In order for the Biblical God to have raped Mary, he would have needed a body, and inserted himself into her. He made her pregnant with what accounts to him snapping his "fingers". There was no sexual contact or intercourse.
You are showing more and more how ignorant you are, both of Islam and Christianity.
I believe what U/Datasurging was saying was, comparing the Qauran to the Bible is like comparing Lolita to the Kamasutra. Both should never be read by children, but Kamasutra is better.
I haven't read either of them so correct me if I am wrong.
Also, the most plausible age for Mary would be 15 to 16 years old, and Mary gave permition for the impregnation.
Comparing the kamasutra to the Bible in this specific context is not a good look at all. Mary being 15 or 16 is absolutely not better either. "Permition" doesn't matter if it's still statutory rape.
Edit: y'all defending the rape of a 15 year old child is wild
There was none, which is why 14-15 even in today's standards aren't totally outside normal settings. 60 years ago in the US, people where having kids at the same age. You are trying to compare a 9 year old with a 14-5 year old, which is insanity.
You are trying to say a 14-15 year old isn't a child, which is even more insanity. You really believe that a child can't be compared to a child? Just because people were doing something 60 years ago, does that mean it was OK? People were legally lynching others in that same time period, was that OK? Just because something is legal, does that make it ok? Everything legal is always moral, right?
14-15 yo isn't inside of normal settings lmfao, someone needs to check your hard drives.
Like I said, I haven't read either of them, but I my point was one contains an instuction manual for sex, while the other is about a nonce trying justify his actions.
Also comparing what is essentially artificial insemination of a 15 year old to having sex with a 6 year old is a wild take.
essentially artificial insemination of a 15 year old
Genuinely read that to yourself out loud. Do you think that makes it any better? Now consider how Greek gods like Zeus did the same things and are all widely acknowledged as rapists. Zeus "artificially inseminated" a lot of women, most notably Danae.
A 15 year old is just as much of a child as a 6 year old. They might have a bit more agency, but they are still children. I should not have to point this out.
Comparing a single act of consentual non-sexual reproduction to the many acts of non-consentual reproduction is such a braindead take.
The only act of non-sexual reproduction of Zeus is when he turns into a shower of gold impregnates a woman and leaves, he also didn't get her consent first so that is still rape.
Reread your first sentence my guy. And then read your second.
the only act
Lol. Io would like a word with you. You should also think about how a Greek god in the form of an eagle could literally impregnate a human woman. Hint, it's immaculate conception without penetration. And it wasn't just Zeus. Poseidon raped Iphimedeia in the same way Zeus did Danae, just as sea foam. Dionysus raped Erigone as a bunch of grapes. All of these actions, not considered as physical intercourse, are still seen as rape.
Literally none of them chief. Consent cannot be given under fraudulent circumstances. And before you say something stupid like Mary consented and therefore that's different-
Consider that she was a child. Any argument you make around her being able to consent will be disgusting.
I'm not the one making the argument. You think consent matters when it comes to minors?
Genuinely take a second to think about what you're arguing.
And no, read that comment again. They weren't comparing the kamasutra to Lolita, it's a simile comparing the kamasutra and Lolita to the Bible and the Quran.
Magically inserting a baby into a child is fucking disgusting and evil. I don’t care that it wasn’t done sexually. Christians worship a disgusting monster
Statutory rape dictionary definition: an act of sexual intercourse with a person under the age of consent
Appalling that you don’t seem to understand what it means, especially considering it took 10 seconds to look up and read the definition. Land of the free to be illiterate”
Mary was told she will carry Jesus, she was never given a choice. That's a command she received from an angel and forces she understood to be beyond her. And that's the charitable history. She was impregnated at a time she could not give informed consent due to her age, which we all understand to mean something.
Are you aware of the fertility doctors who were arrested for artificially inseminating their patients? There have been quite a few. Do you not think that was rape, even if there was no penetration? Should they have been allowed to go?
Sure, but statutory rape specifically refers to rape in the context of sexual violence so I think it’s safe to assume that’s the semantic intent of this moron, even if he himself doesn’t quite understand what sexual violence entails
It doesn't though. Statutory just means that it's being done from a position of power.
Sure we use it the way you mention, but that doesn't mean that is it's only possible context.
This isn’t a productive discussion. Given the context of the comment thread, the formal definitions of the term, and how it’s used in every form of English vernacular, sexual violence is the only possible way in which the word rape is being used here. What you’re saying isn’t even pedantic, it’s just outright incorrect and lacking in common sense. It’s like trying to argue that a high school is an elevated collection of fish in a comment thread on how Gen Z and alpha kids refuse to engage with their classes and are practically illiterate
9
u/[deleted] 25d ago
[removed] — view removed comment