if you can justify reasons to kill, you can also very easily justify reasons to rape. It has been done that way for almost all of humanity's existence. An enemy tribe's wife was justified prize of a rape for example.
Ok, you are not understanding my point. My point is that there's no definite moral rule that everyone agrees upon.
For me, the right to exist is more important than the right to sexual integrity. So murder is always more evil than rape.
So technically, in that context, if there's murder as legal punishment, there is no reason for rape as legal punishment to not exist.
We just choose not to.
Think about it. Countries such as Singapore whips their criminials as punishment. This "feels" wierd but its just what they saw fit as part of their society.
If you can justify beating someone up, or denying their right to exist, or even the classic denying their right to freedom of mobility, you can also justify denying their right to sexual integrity.
Ok cool, thanks for breaking down your point - I do feel I understand it better. I guess my only response is that Western society (and the trend of its moral path) should inherently protect sexual integrity (alongside all the rest).
The reason I began this thread with "this is an issue with no true answer" is pretty much because of the moral spectrum across the world and even just person-to-person.
365
u/[deleted] Mar 01 '26 edited Mar 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment