Should rape by deception be legal for trans people? To have sex without telling they are trans.

[john james]

Then don't. If you are forced to do so against your will, current laws apply.

See above

See above

See above. It isn't rocket science. If this matters to you, avoid circumstances where it is likely to happen. This is hardly a new phenomenon. Women impersonating men and vice versa have been with us for centuries in every culture. Why do you think new measures are needed now?

For some, there isn't a law that can be made that will prevent a some from killing a person who tricks them into having sex with them in this situation. For the protection of trans people they need to not do this or create punishment as an incentives to not do it.

I know people who would rather be dead than for them to be tricked like this. So nothing and no one will stop them from killing the person who tricked them.

So if it doesn't matter to some for the people being tricked than hopefully it will matter for the trans person.

 

[Temujin]

Am I in the same room with her?
You do understand that the pic you posted is so heavily filtered that all identifiers have been washed away... right?
Put the same woman on a park bench beside me, and let me talk directly with her for 5 minutes. Then I can tell you.

This is the answer. If you want to be sure who you are having sex with, try and do so when they are in the same room as you, rather than merely a photograph or video. .

 

[Temujin]

For some, there isn't a law that can be made that will prevent a some from killing a person who tricks them into having sex with them in this situation. For the protection of trans people they need to not do this or create punishment as an incentives to not do it.

No. You don't get to dress up this transphobic garbage as an exercise in protection of trans people.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

And if the adulteress is not pregnant then the "bitter water" abortifacient will have no effect.

Numbers 5:20-28 ERV -
But if you have sinned against your husband—if you had sexual relations with a man who is not your husband—then you are not pure. 21 If that is true, you will have much trouble when you drink this special water. You will not be able to have any children. And if you are pregnant now, your baby will die.[a] And the Lord will cause your people to speak evil of you and curse you.’
“Then the priest must tell the woman to make an oath. She must agree for the Lord to cause these things to happen to her if she lies. 22 The priest must say, ‘You must drink this water that causes trouble. If you have sinned, you will not be able to have children. Any baby you have will die before it is born.’ And the woman should say, ‘I agree to do as you say.’
23 “The priest should write these warnings on a scroll. Then he should wash the words off into the water. 24 Then the woman must drink the water that brings trouble. This water will enter her and, if she is guilty, it will cause her much suffering.
25 “Then the priest will take the grain offering from her (the offering for jealousy) and raise it before the Lord. Then he will carry it to the altar. 26 The priest will fill his hands with some of the grain and put it on the altar and let it burn there. After that he will tell the woman to drink the water. 27 If the woman has sinned against her husband, the water will bring her trouble. The water will go into her body and cause her much suffering. Any baby that is in her will die before it is born, and she will never be able to have children. All the people will turn against her.[b] 28 But if the woman has not sinned against her husband and she is pure, the priest will say that she is not guilty. Then she will be normal and able to have children.

Num 5:27 KJV
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

Sounds like the "ERV" is applying some "creative enhancement" not supported by the Hebrew.

 

[Temujin]

Num 5:27 KJV
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

Sounds like the "ERV" is applying some "creative enhancement" not supported by the Hebrew.

Surely not? A different version of the Bible conveying a different meaning? The Word of God?

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Surely not? A different version of the Bible conveying a different meaning? The Word of God?

Happens all the time. The "Safety" is that the Holy Spirit won't "energize" what He didn't say. BUT HEY!!! your version of the Bible says what you want it so say, so what's your problem????

 

[Thistle]

Num 5:27 KJV
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

Sounds like the "ERV" is applying some "creative enhancement" not supported by the Hebrew.

Turns out you're exactly correct. This link will take you to the interlinear and you could look at every Hebrew word.

Numbers 5:27 Interlinear: yea, he hath caused her to drink the water, and it hath come to pass, if she hath been defiled, and doth commit a trespass against her husband, that the waters which cause the curse have gone into her for bitter things, and

biblehub.com

Don't forget in Hebrew you have to read it from right to left.

 

[Temujin]

Happens all the time. The "Safety" is that the Holy Spirit won't "energize" what He didn't say. BUT HEY!!! your version of the Bible says what you want it so say, so what's your problem????

Oh, I have one somewhere. Virtually the only book in my house that I have read only once.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

My friend you live in a complete fantasy land. This post unduly and unnecessarily long. I gave you the English definition of murder above from the dictionary with the link. That really is the end of the discussion.

"The killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extremeindifference to the value of human life." [link]

Note that the unqualified requirement for murder is "The killing of another person without justification or excuse."

You gave me ONE definition from a hand-picked source and claimed it was the 'standard' definition. It is not, and I posted six (6) definitions which showed it not to be.

The 'standard' English definition is 'unlawful killing of another person'. Abortion, where it is legal, cannot be murder.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

So where I pointed put to you its not legal you didnt agree it was murder either.

I said it might be - which is correct. It needs to satisfy the entire definition in order to be murder, part of which is that a human being is killed. Whether the fetus is or is not a human being is not determined.

So which ones? The ones who make laws that abortion is legal or the ones that make laws that abortion is illegal? Did you not know they differ? Oh no of course you didnt otherwise you wouldnt be posting what you are

What nonsense you talk. The people who make the laws are the people who make the laws. In different jurisdictions they may make different laws. So what?

 

[Thistle]

You gave me ONE definition from a hand-picked source and claimed it was the 'standard' definition.

That is the most obfuscatory sentence ever constructed in the English language. It's 1000 times more than is necessary to put the light of your statement "murder is an unlawful killing by definition." This definition does not involve an unlawful killing. It is the primary standard English language definition of murder.

It is not, and I posted six (6) definitions which showed it not to be.

I don't think you understand how a dictionary works. Definition one does not disqualify definition 2,3,4,5 or six.

The 'standard' English definition is 'unlawful killing of another person'.

No it's not. It's what I cited above. But it doesn't matter you can't say that murder is unlawful by definition.

Abortion, where it is legal, cannot be murder.

That is the stupidest statement in the context of this post ever made.

 

[J regia]

Num 5:27 KJV
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

Sounds like the "ERV" is applying some "creative enhancement" not supported by the Hebrew.

IOW that's just an antiquated way of saying pregnancies of adulteresses are commanded to be terminated since male adulterers are not also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it".

Numbers 5:20-28 GW -
20 If, in fact, you have been unfaithful and have had sexual intercourse with another man, 21 may the Lord make you an example for your people to see what happens when the curse of this oath comes true: The Lord will make your uterus drop and your stomach swell.’ [a]
“Then the priest will administer the oath and the curse by saying: 22 ‘May this water that can bring a curse go into your body and make your stomach swell and your uterus drop!’
“Then the woman will say, ‘Amen, amen!’
23 “The priest will write these curses on a scroll and wash them off into the bitter water. 24 Then he will have the woman drink the bitter water that can bring the curse. This water will go into her ⌞and⌟ become bitter. 25 The priest will take the grain offering she was holding, present it to the Lord, and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest will take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar. Then he will have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has become unclean by being unfaithful to her husband, the water that can bring the curse will go into her and become bitter. Her stomach will swell, her uterus will drop, and she will become cursed among her people. 28 But if the woman is not unclean and is pure, she is not guilty and will be able to have children.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

That is the most obfuscatory sentence ever constructed in the English language.

...except that it's plain, clear and correct.

It's 1000 times more than is necessary to put the light of your statement "murder is an unlawful killing by definition." This definition does not involve an unlawful killing.

Again, ONE definition. ONE. From ONE source. Which you had to hunt for, avoiding all the other definitions which didn't suit your purpose.

It is the primary standard English language definition of murder.

That is blatantly false, as you well know.

I don't think you understand how a dictionary works.

Then you think wrongly. Again.

Definition one does not disqualify definition 2,3,4,5 or six.

Since nobody said anything about that...so what?

No it's not.

Of course it is. Six different sources give my definition. One gave yours. To claim that that one is the 'standard English definition' is either vacuously stupid or simply dishonest.

It's what I cited above.

Nope.

But it doesn't matter you can't say that murder is unlawful by definition.

Yes, it does. Because it is.

That is the stupidest statement in the context of this post ever made.

I'm not surprised that mindless insult is the best you have to combat statements of fact.

 

[BMS]

This is the answer. If you want to be sure who you are having sex with, try and do so when they are in the same room as you, rather than merely a photograph or video. .

How does one have sex with someone in a video rather than the same room?

 

[Temujin]

How does one have sex with someone in a video rather than the same room?

Lol! How do you think? Good grief, I'm not doing you a diagram. This is one thing that you really should be able to work out on your own. (pun intended)

 

[Bob1]

Should rape by deception be legal for trans people? To have sex without telling they are trans.

My friend is a victim of this. The person didn't share they were trans until after wards. My friend stopped all communication with the trans person. And is trying to cope with traumatic experience. They dealing with a high level of anxiety now. They are afraid to have any social interactions with anyone male or female they don't already know because they are scared they can't tell the difference.

I wouldn't say it constitutes rape, but it is deceptive. At the very least it qualifies as unethical to not reveal one's status as a trans prior to engaging in intimate/sexual acts.

 

[BMS]

Lol! How do you think? Good grief, I'm not doing you a diagram. This is one thing that you really should be able to work out on your own. (pun intended)

I think you need to. Do you mean they both masturbate, in which case they arguably aren't having sex with each other

 

[BMS]

I wouldn't say it constitutes rape, but it is deceptive. At the very least it qualifies as unethical to not reveal one's status as a trans prior to engaging in intimate/sexual acts.

I tend to agree with you except that they need to identity their sex, not their status as trans.

 

[BMS]

I said it might be - which is correct. It needs to satisfy the entire definition in order to be murder, part of which is that a human being is killed. Whether the fetus is or is not a human being is not determined.


What nonsense you talk. The people who make the laws are the people who make the laws. In different jurisdictions they may make different laws. So what?

So I will cite will cite the laws I agree with, which makes the laws you agree with wrong.

 

[Temujin]

I think you need to. Do you mean they both masturbate, in which case they arguably aren't having sex with each other

That is the whole point, or rather half the point. The other half being that I didn't say there was anything mutual about it.

I wouldn't mind, but others apparently got the joke. It must be my "failure to communicate" that only affects you, again.