Pants-of-dog wrote:It is weird and interesting that she commits murder if she does not let herself be raped by her husband, but it is not murder if she does not let herself be raped by a stranger.
Are they not potential people outside of matrimony? Does marriage change how logic and biology work?
Pants-of-dog wrote:After all, these are just special and weird situations that do not change the fact that they are avoiding that sexual.contact that would reault in people, all things being equal.
The social circumstance of marriage, which was actually mentioned in the OP, if followed in strict monogamous form, and followed at a universal level, would have serious biological implications, so there is a relationship between the two.
Once again, the non-practice of contraception would only maximize the actualization of life if strict monogamy were followed, for only such, could guarantee the universal sex ratio (a mystery of science) of 1:1. Polygamy and polyamory, cause more anti-procreative sex if followed, and married men having affairs or raping other women amount to the same logical consequence as polygamy and polyamory as far as the sex ratio is concerned.
As is explained in the section quoted. Pants-of-dog wrote:Let us assume she is unmarried
Pants-of-dog wrote:Let us assume he is also not married
Hmmmm, I think this the same situation as with abortion and is a silly example when you think about it. You are creating an oxymoronic concept of "consenting to rape," What the fuck does that even mean? Rape is not necessary to actualize potential life, but if it happens (as terrible as that is), i do not think the woman should abort (morally speaking); however, for single men and single women, monogomous marriage, early in life, is essential so that the legal actualization of life, contractually upheld, will be efficiently maximized both by maintaining the sex ratio and by the stable social institution that typically guarantees safety and provision for actualized offspring.
Rape is impulsive and gives no security or provision, it can be refused,
because no single woman is obligated to mate with that particular man in order to guarantee life, as she is single (the same goes for him).
Refusing him is not a refusal of life, because she could consent to the other guys she met at the party, etc.ingliz wrote:I can quote Luke in support of my argument.
[A]s my Father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint for you that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you (Gr.—humas, plural—“you all”), that he might sift you (Gr.—plural again) like wheat, but I have prayed for you (Gr.—sou, singular—Peter alone) that your faith (Gr.—singular again) may not fail; and when you (Gr.—singular) have turned again, strengthen your brethren.
Luke 22:29-32
And John.
“I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—
John 10:14
And I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, and one shepherd
John 10:16
Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”
He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.”
John 21:16
Jesus the shepherd in John 10:14 commands Peter to be the shepherd of John 10:16 to shepherd the entire people of God.
How many of the sheep belong to Jesus?
All of them.
How many of his sheep did Jesus give to St. Peter to shepherd?
All of them.
1. How do these texts prove papal infallibility and unique, absolute, and universal authority exclusively to the Bishop of Rome?
And Not Just Primacy, As I Fully Support?2. If all the sheep were given to St. Peter alone, were the other Bishoprics that did not acknowledge absolute authority in the pope, necessarily outside of Christ?
3. If St. Peter was given primacy by Christ, which I have no problem with, and the linear successors deny the faith by heresy, how can they still be said to be executing the office of Christ given the words you quoted:
"but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."4. Also, how does it follow that if Christ asks Peter to watch His sheep, that now St. Peter replaces Christ as the one Shepherd?
5. You never answered the other objections made to your textual usage, or the historical examples.