[Response to: Sodom, the sin wasn't sodomy. The sin was attempting to rape guests. Big difference.]
the guests were men, read the word. The ones wanting to rape the guests refused LOT'S DAUGHTERS! They only wanted men.
49 comments
Well, maybe because Lot's daughters were not the foreigners they wanted to humilliate. There is a big difference between consenting sex and rape. And by the way, if so, if they couldn't be attracted to women(Lot, living in that city would know that), he wouldn't have offered them, in the first place.
Yeah, that reminds me how shitty a father Lot was.
It is important to note that Lot eventually tapped that.
No, read it again, you moron. Lot offered the crowd his virgin daughters to rape if the crowd would leave his guests alone. The crowd didn't want to rape the guests, they wanted to drag them out into the street and kill them.
"Here, gangbang my daughters, but let my guests have dinner in peace."
That is a helluva spin you are putting on it.
The fundie is right by the way, the mob did only wanted the male guests.
So, according to you Whitney, it's okay to rape women but not men.
Ugh. The lengths they'll go to, to justify their delusions.
And if they had accepted his daughters would it have meant that being straight is a sin or what?. The whole thing is that he offered his daughters in order to preserve his duty of hospitality, not to prevent a homosexual act. You forget the little detail that those guys were his guests and in beduine societies, hospitality is sacred.
It's funny, only the xtians seem to think this story is about homosexuality. I was taught their sin was the cruelty and lack of compassion they had toward the guests.
I also always thought it disturbing how Lot was willing to give his daughters to them.
God said He wouldn't destroy Sodom if there were ten righteous people in it. Is Whitney suggesting Sodom was some sort of gay commune where everyone was a homosexual? That's pretty far-fetched. As JewBoy (#664805) said, this is a Christian interpretation. The Jews have almost always interpreted the "sin" of Sodom as a lack of charity, pride of wealth and a hatred of strangers.
Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. (Ezek. 16:49)
It would help if you actually had a basic grasp of how travelers were treated back then, whitney. Visitors to a city didn't have any rights or protection of any form, and if they weren't offered hospitality by a citizen became fair game for ill treatment, generally in which the travelers' were forced to 'be the woman' in a sexually abusive act for the sport of the male citizens. However Lot offers his hospitality. So when the men demand he send them out, he would be going against the hospitality codes of that time and putting his and his households honor on the line. Instead he offers his virgin daughters as the nights entertainment, which is just sick, but for some reason god finds him worthy of deliverance from his fiery wrath. >> But in the end wasn't about the citizens of Sodom being homosexual at all, but breaking the hospitality codes and being inhospitable. Or gang rapists. Or just being sick motherfuckers. take your pick. But there is a big difference between loving and sincere gay relationships and rape, homosexual or heterosexual. So get it right, damnit.
I suspect if Lot had offered himself the people would have refused that too. It wasn't about wanting men, it was about wanting his visitors, and it wasn't that they were horny, it's that they were cruel and vicious and wanted to hurt the visitors and ruin Lot by raping his guests. (Remember that in that culture hospitality was HUGE; a much bigger deal than fatherhood.)
Nope, they had sex with his daughters dumbass, read your own fucking book. Also, Lot also tapped that.
The ones wanting to rape the guests refused LOT'S DAUGHTERS! They only wanted men.
- How amazingly stupid, then, of Lot to offer his daughters.
But if you read Jeremiah, and what Jesus says, male rape is not the sin of Sodom.
Try again when you have learned to read, digest and understand
The sad part is, it doesn't even necessarily say the Sodomites wanted to rape anybody. I always picture a mob coming up to Lot's house with knives and such, "Hey, heard you've god some guests *sneer sneer* we'd like to meet them..." "NO!! I have young nubile daughters, do whatever you fuckers want to get your sadistic kicks, but leave the angels alone!"
The mob refused the opportunity to get some rape in with their slaughter, indicating not that they're gay, but that they're just that inhospitable to strangers. Sounds like Deliverance, amirite?
665250
If you understand the biblical references to rape than it does say they wanted to rape them. To "know" someone in the bible means to fuck them.
In every version of the bible I've ever read has had the mob saying that they want to "know" the guests. I even had a child's bible that used the word sex to describe what they wanted to do.
Lets not forget that Lot's daughters were virgins and still part of his household, so they were unmarried. This makes them what? 14 at most?
So he offers them up so that they can be raped (not the only time that a man offers up women in his 'care' to be raped in the bible by the way). Then later on these virgin girls get him drunk and seduce him. Sounds like a lie to me. How many men get drunk and accidentally have sex with their daughters? Not any of the sane ones anyway.
And where did they get the booze? When fleeing a city with all you can carry, make sure you take the wine. That's essential and easily portable.
I think Lot was a bit less righteous and a bit more like the guy who kept a secret inbred family in his basement.
@Amanda: That is now going on my website, all credits to you. ^^
And on an added note, if the girls didn't scream loud enough when they were raped by the whole frigging place, they'd be stoned, wouldn't they?
Great parenting, Lot. Yep. I applaude your movement.
Ah, well if they wouldn't have raped the girls that makes the story morally all right then. Here I was all upset that a father would put some out of town guests ahead of his flesh and blood daughters. Silly me, I guess I missed the memo on "Morality for the Masses"
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
