Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 05:31 PM Feb 2012

So, all guys not schtupping their brothers' wives are sinners

Genesis 38: 9-10 ESV

But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.


This rationale against masturbation is, in fact, telling men they must fornicate with their sisters-in-law in order to be good in the sight of god - right? I mean, why should context matter - why should living in a society in which females had no legal protection and had to come by it via family connections matter in this issue - it's really all about whacking off, right?

If a religion can take a story of levirate marriage and contort that into a dictum against birth control - what value does that religion have? What useful function does it serve in a society that has accepted that women and men are equally human and valuable - and may own property and conduct business or hold govt. office because women are not inferior nor subject to every person on the planet who happens to have a penis?

And how does anyone get to the point of a ban on birth control when the issue was a male who withdrew - the female wasn't doing anything other than her societal injunction here - Levirate marriage - family control of whom a female might marry because she had no rights herself - which, apparently, is how god is supposed to function in a democracy, too? No matter that our morals have evolved to the point that we do not consider all women commodities to be bought and sold (tho some, obviously, are.)

(c.f. Ruth and Boaz, as well.)

What value does support for any institution that codifies females as second-class citizens have for a modern democracy? I cannot think of one.
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So, all guys not schtupping their brothers' wives are sinners (Original Post) RainDog Feb 2012 OP
Doesn't it say that this was bad? Lawlbringer Feb 2012 #1
yeah. literally - if you fuck your s-i-l RainDog Feb 2012 #3
All people who know they are infertile are sinning if they have any sex whatsoever. kestrel91316 Feb 2012 #2
unless you're a priest n/t RainDog Feb 2012 #4
I've looked at a few different right wing religious sites RainDog Feb 2012 #5

Lawlbringer

(550 posts)
1. Doesn't it say that this was bad?
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 05:58 PM
Feb 2012

Granted, according to this, God would be happy if guys impregnated their sisters-in-law. But it's just as long as they don't pull out, and are explicitly trying to make babies. Right?

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
3. yeah. literally - if you fuck your s-i-l
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 07:02 PM
Feb 2012

it's okay - as long as you make a deposit into the family sperm bank.

...and this is an example for us all to follow, I suppose. after all, it's holy writ.

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
2. All people who know they are infertile are sinning if they have any sex whatsoever.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 06:43 PM
Feb 2012

Sex is ONLY EVER for procreation. Period.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
5. I've looked at a few different right wing religious sites
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 07:27 PM
Feb 2012

and, in fact, THERE IS NOT ONE BIT OF WRITING in the ENTIRE BIBLE that tells women it's not okay to use birth control.

NOT ONE.

so, you religious assholes - you're fucking liars.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So, all guys not schtuppi...