The Sex, the Violence, the Hideous Crimes in the Holy Bible: Lot’s Story

[msnobody]

How many students do you suppose go to their school library and read/check out a Bible? My guess is not too many.

[markc]

How many students do you suppose go to their school library and read/check out a Bible? My guess is not too many.

Not many; it's just taught as the only book that contains the whole truth, that everyone should read it, that their kids should follow it. When I was growing up, I believed in it (and read it, obviously).

On the other hand, some classics are banned (for example, https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watc ... y-in-2023/).

My point is: so many have no idea what the Bible really is about. Therefore, the double standard.

[Dr. Shades]

Actually, no; the point of sex is to propagate the species.

You seem to have missed out on some important things.

Sure, humans have figured out that it feels good and have long enough memories (about the sex they've had in the past) to want to recreate the experience for sheer pleasure rather than reproduction, but that doesn't overturn the fact that the point of sex is to propagate the species.

[Marcus]

...ETA: I don't agree with forcing vaccines. My kids are vaccinated but begrudgingly so. There have been enough vaccine damage cases that it is terrifying to ask a parent to do that. And yes, the science makes sense. But the side effects don't. It's not a decision that can be forced. And forcing it will cause people to think something is wrong...

I just need to respond to this. The disinformation in stories of 'vaccine damage cases' related to the standard children's vaccination schedule is immense. And anecdotal stories of correlation in no way demonstrate causality. I say anecdotal 'stories' rather than anecdotal 'evidence' to emphasize that these scare stories do not rise to the level of even evidence of correlation, let alone causality.

Requiring the standard children's vaccination schedule as a condition for entry into school, etc., is based on well-established, long verified and completely valid scientific research. This requirement shouldn't be interpreted as implying something is wrong.

I understand and am empathetic that personal experiences can affect this understanding of the scientific knowledge available, and I agree parents should have much autonomy, but avoiding standard vaccines has caused and still causes tremendous damage in communities. We went through that some years back in my state, resulting in a completely avoidable epidemic of a previously almost totally eradicated childhood disease.

[markc]

I just need to respond to this. The disinformation in stories of 'vaccine damage cases' related to the standard children's vaccination schedule is immense. And anecdotal stories of correlation in no way demonstrate causality. I say anecdotal 'stories' rather than anecdotal 'evidence' to emphasize that these scare stories do not rise to the level of even evidence of correlation, let alone causality.

Requiring the standard children's vaccination schedule as a condition for entry into school, etc., is based on well-established, long verified and completely valid scientific research. This requirement shouldn't be interpreted as implying something is wrong.

I understand and am empathetic that personal experiences can affect this understanding of the scientific knowledge available, and I agree parents should have much autonomy, but avoiding standard vaccines has caused and still causes tremendous damage in communities. We went through that some years back in my state, resulting in a completely avoidable epidemic of a previously almost totally eradicated childhood disease.

Can't agree more. Appreciate it.

[markc]

Just going to reply to this again to try to explain what I was saying...

So, nothing to do with the angels or the mob or rapes...

Purely discussing the evening the women got their dad drunk and became pregnant. Take everything else out of the picture for a moment so I can explain my point...

When women live together, their periods adjust and their cycle matches up (unless they are taking contraceptive medicine). Some people dispute this and don't think there is enough evidence but if we did a poll, I'm sure there would be a fair amount of women who have experienced it (maybe not a poll on this board because there don't seem to be many people here anymore). So when I lived with other females at university, our cycles changed and we had our periods at the same time. One house mate told me I influenced her because she was always 28 days and she became 23 days. Which means we would ovulate at the same time. So Lot's daughters may well have had their periods and ovulation at the same time meaning that if they both had sex during their fertile period then they both could have a high chance of falling pregnant and given that they did apparently fall pregnant, we can say they probably didn't have fertility issues.

Ovulation falls at the same time as hormones that make you want a baby somehow happen (not for all women). I don't want another baby but I know when I'm ovulating because I get very broody for 2 days along with other symptoms. There is a symptom that happens that makes it very clear you are ovulating. I know a lot of women don't recognise it and it's kinda gross. But when you know what it is, you know it's because you are ovulating.

There is a good chance that the daughters would have felt that they were fertile and would have felt the need to do that. They must have been fertile to fall pregnant. So they would have both been in the window of conception.

So the probability of them falling pregnant at the same time in a one-off event is actually higher than you stated.

The other explanation is that this happened multiple times.

Just a note: I think the chance of pregnancy in a one-off event is still low; even if the women really match their period and are ovulating. The science report I shared suggests that. Your opinion is interesting though, and quite likely at least has some truth in it.

But I have a question that can be sensitive, so if you don't want to answer that's perfectly fine: What do you think about incest?

As seemingly repulsive to many as it is, many countries, including typically "conservative" or "collectivistic" countries like Japan and China, do not perceive it as a crime (though getting married/bearing children is another matter), and I know some other countries are discussing "de-crime" incest, based on the thinking that it is a moral question, not a legal question.

And from quite a few stories on the internet and news reports, we know it is happening, between mature, responsible adults.

Though I personally also want to go on a limb and say that it can be very tricky. In the example of parent-children cases, even for an adult child, his/her parent(s) still have certain authority over them, how do we know it's not "grooming?" For brother-sister cases, it might have the same problem. On the other hand, however, punishing two people who are "in love," or even just hooking up but not hurting anyone, is that necessary?

This is a sincere question. Anyone who has opinions is welcome to share.

Edit: Grammar.

[Imwashingmypirate]

Just a note: I think the chance of pregnancy in a one-off event is still low; even if the women really match their period and are ovulating. The science report I shared suggests that. Your opinion is interesting though, and quite likely at least has some truth in it.

But I have a question that can be sensitive, so if you don't want to answer that's perfectly fine: What do you think about incest?

As seemingly repulsive to many as it is, many countries, including typically "conservative" or "collectivistic" countries like Japan and China, do not perceive it as a crime (though getting married/bearing children is another matter), and I know some other countries are discussing "de-crime" incest, based on the thinking that it is a moral question, not a legal question.

And from quite a few stories on the internet and news reports, we know it is happening, between mature, responsible adults.

Though I personally also want to go on a limb and say that it can be very tricky. In the example of parent-children cases, even for an adult child, his/her parent(s) still have certain authority over them, how do we know it's not "grooming?" For brother-sister cases, it might have the same problem. On the other hand, however, punishing two people who are "in love," or even just hooking up but not hurting anyone, is that necessary?

This is a sincere question. Anyone who has opinions is welcome to share.

Edit: Grammar.

I don't agree with it but each to their own. It doesn't feel right. I think that if people are brought up being told it is normal then it will feel normal to them but it's not how I was raised. I think step siblings are different, I think they should be ok as long as they aren't biologically closely related.

[Imwashingmypirate]

...ETA: I don't agree with forcing vaccines. My kids are vaccinated but begrudgingly so. There have been enough vaccine damage cases that it is terrifying to ask a parent to do that. And yes, the science makes sense. But the side effects don't. It's not a decision that can be forced. And forcing it will cause people to think something is wrong...

I just need to respond to this. The disinformation in stories of 'vaccine damage cases' related to the standard children's vaccination schedule is immense. And anecdotal stories of correlation in no way demonstrate causality. I say anecdotal 'stories' rather than anecdotal 'evidence' to emphasize that these scare stories do not rise to the level of even evidence of correlation, let alone causality.

Requiring the standard children's vaccination schedule as a condition for entry into school, etc., is based on well-established, long verified and completely valid scientific research. This requirement shouldn't be interpreted as implying something is wrong.

I understand and am empathetic that personal experiences can affect this understanding of the scientific knowledge available, and I agree parents should have much autonomy, but avoiding standard vaccines has caused and still causes tremendous damage in communities. We went through that some years back in my state, resulting in a completely avoidable epidemic of a previously almost totally eradicated childhood disease.

Thanks for this.

[Imwashingmypirate]

You seem to have missed out on some important things.

Sure, humans have figured out that it feels good and have long enough memories (about the sex they've had in the past) to want to recreate the experience for sheer pleasure rather than reproduction, but that doesn't overturn the fact that the point of sex is to propagate the species.

Think chap was just being pernickety.

[huckelberry]

How many students do you suppose go to their school library and read/check out a Bible? My guess is not too many.

Not many; it's just taught as the only book that contains the whole truth, that everyone should read it, that their kids should follow it. When I was growing up, I believed in it (and read it, obviously).

On the other hand, some classics are banned (for example, https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watc ... y-in-2023/).

My point is: so many have no idea what the Bible really is about. Therefore, the double standard.

Markc, this newspaper article made what you are saying here much clearer. Florida's law sounds like the result of some hysteria and results in confusion and repression. I do not know what is the best quick response but your complaint about the Bible certainly makes sense in this context.

From the linked article:

The list stems from two Florida laws signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who is also running for president. They require media specialists to review books in libraries and classrooms, and to exclude books that include sexually lewd material or pornography. The legislation also aims to give parents greater ability to raise objections to their children’s education.

The books on the list range from well-known classics to popular contemporary novels. The newspaper noted that the list contains books found in teachers’ classrooms, not in school libraries. The newspaper also noted that not all of the books were necessarily part of required instruction, but were available to students if they wanted to read them.

On the list were classics including John Steinbeck’s “East of Eden,” John Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” Toni Morrison’s “Beloved” and Betty Smith’s “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn.”

Others were part of high school curricula, the newspaper reported, citing teachers. Those included “The Color Purple,” “Catch-22” and “Brave New World.”

Catch 22?? It has been so many years since I read that that I have no memory of bawdy parts. I do think it is a dangerous book. I might have died laughing.

Somehow comedy might be the best response to such a blindingly stupid law.