Deuteronomy 22:29
the man who raped her is to give the young woman’s father fifty silver shekels, and she will become his wife because he violated her. He cannot divorce her as long as he lives.
And this is ok???? 🤬
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
113 points (93.8% liked)
politics
19126 readers
2494 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
As far as Republicans are concerned:
With the chapter and verse citation, yes because Bible.
Without the citation, no because it's not like they've read the Bible.
As policy they support, yes.
Don’t give them any ideas. They’re already complaining about no-fault divorce laws.
The song of solomon is way more pornographic than the above. Talks about donkey dicks, etc.
It’s like the PMRC hearings of the 80s, where, to get music censorship laws passed, campaigners recited the most extreme lyrics they could find. There was a recording of Tipper Gore saying “bend up and waft my anal vapors”.
You said anal vapor. Heh he he heh. (I just had a Beavis and Butthead moment)
...I appreciate the argument that we’ve, our discussion that we’ve been having. But for me, it’s a little too conceptual or I don’t know, metaphysical or geological or whatever you want to call it.
Geological??
I thought he mispronounced 'theological' as 'teological' . I'm not defending him, that's just what I heard.
Anyone know what grade level these were for? Middle school seems a bit low for this kind of material but 14-15 year olds? Yeah, they know what sex is.
It's an excerpt from "All Boys Aren't Blue" and appears to be rated for grades 10-12. It's about abuse and isn't erotic. I think the author's note fully explains the intent, which is totally lost on the senator:
In writing this book, I wanted to be as authentic and truthful about my experience as possible. I wanted my story to be told in totality: the good, the bad, and the things I was always too afraid to talk about publicly. This meant going to places and discussing some subjects that are often kept away from teens for fear of them being "too heavy." But the truth of the matter is, these things happened to me when I was a child, teenager, and young adult. So as heavy as these subjects may be, it is necessary that they are not only told, but also read by teens who may have to navigate many of these same experiences in their own lives. This book will touch on sexual assault (including molestation), loss of virginity, homophobia, racism, and anti- Blackness. These discussions at times may be a bit graphic, but nonetheless they are experiences that many reading this book will encounter or have already encountered. And I want those readers to be seen and heard in these pages.
So this is a nonfiction work about the author's actual experiences as a teenager? Yeah we really need to stop pretending teenagers are innocent little flowers who never encounter stuff like this (that they often don't understand and have no one to talk to about)
It's from All Boys Aren't Blue which has a young adult audience.
The question isn't: who decides who can read a book? The question is: Who the FUCK does Senator John Kennedy think he is, to decide whether or not ANYONE can read ANY book? I don't care if the book is Gender Queer, or The Bible, or goddamn Everyone Poops.
The argument isn't about books, and it's not about children. These assholes think they can stop the world from spinning if they keep people from reading about the Earth's rotation. It's fucking mind-boggling.