• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

All cultures and religions are equal!

boyntonstu

Banned
B
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
908
Outrage as Egypt plans 'farewell intercourse law' so husbands can have sex with DEAD wives up to six hours after their death
By LEE MORAN

PUBLISHED: 04:28 EST, 26 April 2012 | UPDATED: 05:55 EST, 26 April 2012

Comments (398)
Share

Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives - for up to six hours after their death.

The controversial new law is part of a raft of measures being introduced by the Islamist-dominated parliament.

It will also see the minimum age of marriage lowered to 14 and the ridding of women's rights of getting education and employment.
Click to expand...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...usbands-sex-dead-wives-hours-AFTER-death.html

Love is beautiful, the second time around....
 
Virus said:
All he says is it's not true because it shouldn't be true. He hasn't actually verified the law was never proposed.
Click to expand...

You ought to look into the Superior Western Cultural Value known as "burden of proof" sometime.

Because so far, no one has been able to find any evidence that the law has been proposed. Andrew Sullivan is backtracking on the story because of that, as is the Huffington Post.

Even Hot Air's Allahpundit thinks the unlikely nature of the story combined with a lack of evidence means the story is a complete crock.

The editor of the Middle East Journal wrote a fairly in-depth piece about how and why this nonsense story spread.
 
Last edited:
ANTPogo said:
You ought to look into the Superior Western Cultural Value called "burden of proof" sometime.
Click to expand...

I can point out an Is/Ought fallacy if I want.

Maybe is isn't true. Hard to tell given the overwhelming amount of idiocy that country produces.
 
Virus said:
I can point out an Is/Ought fallacy if I want.
Click to expand...

Can you point out the fallacy of believing something to be true when there is no evidence whatsoever that it is true? Especially when everyone who has actually investigated whether it's true has found only evidence that it's not true after all?

Maybe is isn't true. Hard to tell given the overwhelming amount of idiocy that country produces.
Click to expand...

I think Sarah Carr said it best:

While I appreciate that the Daily Mail sifts the Internet daily for news pieces that will confirm to its readers that Muslims are all book-burning, wife-incarcerating, turban-wearing lunatics, and while I appreciate that this item is particularly attractive because of its salaciousness, if Lee Moran had troubled himself to do a little bit of research beyond translating an op-ed and a TV talking head, he would have discovered that in fact, a draft law to allow men to bonk their deceased wives does not exist. This may seem remarkable, given that Egyptians (i.e. scary mooslems) revolted in 2011 for PRECISELY this right, but there we are.

If Mr Moran's googling had been more thorough he would have discovered that this rumour was started by a local wacko who, alas, has a public platform by virtue of the fact that he owns a satellite channel.
Click to expand...

But hey, so far it's been mostly Muslims and Egyptians who have been actually investigating this story, rather than simply regurgitating the latest Islamophobic nonsense from the Daily Mail.

Maybe you and your Superior Western Culture will be the first to find some actual evidence that this story is, indeed, true after all.
 
Last edited:
Virus said:
All he says is it's not true because it shouldn't be true. He hasn't actually verified the law was never proposed.
Click to expand...

Two things:

First, the standard is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Legalized necrophilia definitely falls under the category of an extraordinary claim. Saying it could be true and then demanding proof it's not is reminiscent of the kind of reasoning the anti-Israel idiots use when they keep dredging up idiotic claims in their crusade. Also, bogus claims discredit and take attention away from real issues that need to be addressed.

Second, even if somewhere someone had written such a proposal, it's not evidence anyone actually supports it. It's common in the democratic process for someone to make a proposal in order to make a political point, without actually wanting to to be passed. For this reason it's not enough to know if it's true, but if true you also need to understand the context in which the issue is raised.

For example, here is a clip from the Daily Show about an Oklahoma state legislature who proposed an amendment to an existing law making it illegal for a man to deposit his sperm anywhere other than a woman's vagina. Effectively this law would make male masturbation illegal, as well as a number of other sex practices. But the congresswoman who proposed the law doesn't really want to see it passed, she's just making a point about another law that grants citizenship rights at the moment of conception.

Watch it, it's funny.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-11-2012/bro-choice
 
Mycroft said:
Two things:

First, the standard is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Legalized necrophilia definitely falls under the category of an extraordinary claim. Saying it could be true and then demanding proof it's not is reminiscent of the kind of reasoning the anti-Israel idiots use when they keep dredging up idiotic claims in their crusade. Also, bogus claims discredit and take attention away from real issues that need to be addressed.

Second, even if somewhere someone had written such a proposal, it's not evidence anyone actually supports it. It's common in the democratic process for someone to make a proposal in order to make a political point, without actually wanting to to be passed. For this reason it's not enough to know if it's true, but if true you also need to understand the context in which the issue is raised.

For example, here is a clip from the Daily Show about an Oklahoma state legislature who proposed an amendment to an existing law making it illegal for a man to deposit his sperm anywhere other than a woman's vagina. Effectively this law would make male masturbation illegal, as well as a number of other sex practices. But the congresswoman who proposed the law doesn't really want to see it passed, she's just making a point about another law that grants citizenship rights at the moment of conception.

Watch it, it's funny.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-11-2012/bro-choice
Click to expand...

QFT
 
Okay - it's probably false, but....

What if it was true? What, exactly, would be the harm. It ain't like the wife is going to mind.
 
sarge said:
Okay - it's probably false, but....

What if it was true? What, exactly, would be the harm. It ain't like the wife is going to mind.
Click to expand...

This was my exact thought as well. I'm not nearly as horrified as everyone else seems to be.
 
sarge said:
Okay - it's probably false, but....

What if it was true? What, exactly, would be the harm. It ain't like the wife is going to mind.
Click to expand...

If the ick factor of necrophilia isn't enough for you, I'd point out that someone who considers you to be just as viable a sex partner a few hours after you died as you were before probably considers you to be more of an object for their own gratification than a human being.
 
Mycroft said:
If the ick factor of necrophilia isn't enough for you, I'd point out that someone who considers you to be just as viable a sex partner a few hours after you died as you were before probably considers you to be more of an object for their own gratification than a human being.
Click to expand...

And?

Gay sex is "icky". Grandma sex is icky. That a straight, middle-aged white guy like me finds something icky isn't a compeling reason to prohibit that something. Of course, if the corpse objects, that's a different matter.

As for considering a person an object for my own gratification, I have treated more than 100 (living) women in exactly that manner. Presumably, they were reciprocating in their treatment of me.
 
"You would have sworn that she was conscious from the top of her head to the tag on her toes."
Emo Phipps
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom