• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Arab guilty of rape after consensual sex with Jew

Approximately 0 females have lied to get me in the sack.
Now I'm sad. :(

Sounds like a personal problem... ahh to be young, single, and in Shanghai again...

Seriously, this sounds completely dumb. Yeah, dangerous diseases I can understand... but lying about religion? How many men (and women) have fibbed about something to get an attractive member of the opposite gender for a round or two in the hay???
 
This issue is a sticky one. Is the conviction proper, or was the Arab man wrongfully convicted of rape? Personally, I believe no criminal charges should have been filed, but there is definitely a civil suit here for misrepresentation.

What would it be like in America if Rape by Deception was a crime? Just think of all those guys at McDonald's, who tell women that they are scientists or corporate executives, that would be in prison right now. That could be at least 20% of everybody who posts on the internet. LOL.

Seriously, though, what do you think?

Article is here.


In the US and probably a lot of other countries the woman would have been laughed and told to piss off. Those judges and the other morons who decided to have that man convicted should be the ones in prison.
 
Seems messed up to me.

Hopefully, he will be able to appeal and get off the hook.
 
I can't even understand why you would call it a sticky issue. It was consensual sex. Enough said. I will never understand this culture or religion. It is so archiac as to be mind-boggling. If these people want to be respected in the world and have a place on the world stage, they've got to look into themselves and begin slowly changing these ridiculous practices.

If this kind of law were allowed in the US, our prisons couldn't even hold the offenders. "I'm single." "I'm divorced." "I'm a doctor." And, yes, some Christians would say they were Jews. Parish the thought.

By the way, is this woman, an Arab, in any danger of being stoned to death because she had sex before marriage?

I would have thought that you were more responsible and would have read the article prior to making some pithy remark.
The woman in question was and is Jewish.
I doubt that any Rabbi would order her to be stoned to death.
 
If there is a law justifying the charges, then the law is archaic; if there is no law justifying the charges, then the case is bunk.

Either way, it is a demonstration of judicial stupidity.
 
Anyhoo, as I said in the other thread:

Lying, unless it's perjury in a court of law or it directly results in another offense such as inflicting bodily harm, theft or defamation of character should not be punishable by law. Taking Mohamed to court because he lied and told you his name was Samuel is not a good reason to jail someone. What this judge has done is to reward this woman for her prejudice. He just sent out a loud and clear message that racism is totally acceptable.

This woman should be ashamed of herself. I can't believe I share a gender with the likes of her. Her actions are just as despicable as those of the man who lied to get in her pants. She picks up some stranger on the street, chats with him for two minutes, willingly has sex with him and then has the audacity to have him prosecuted for rape??

Humans disgust me sometimes.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...-sentenced-18-months-jail.html#post1058871532
 
Last edited:
Hard for me to really have an opinion on this as I don't know what the laws are or the society really. I would view it similar to the alcohol thing here. Sex while intoxicated is in a sense consensual, albiet possibly due to altered reality. But in our society its viewed as definitive rape because its what the law is and just how most have been raised to think.

I could easily see elsewhere having a society, based on laws and customs, that thinks knowingly decieving people about yourself in regards to things that are likely to help/harm you getting laid is essentially altering reality and thus is making it so that the sex isn't really "consensual". Think of it as being sold a car that you were told was in good condition and was like new and on first glance and inspection appeared that way, and then after you get it home realizing all the parts inside are actually on the verge of breaking and the AC actually recycles exhaust into the car after 10 minutes of riding. One would say they were "decieved" and while they knowingly bought the car, they bought it under false pretenses. If a society views sex by deception as as a similar type thing then, much like our society and booze, I can definitely see it being acceptable as rape.

I guess what I'm saying is while I think that'd make little sense in our society, I could very easily see it in another culture and without knowing more information it'd be hard for me to say if its "wrong" or not for this man to be charged.
 
For having sex while drunk to be considered rape the woman has to be extremely drunk though, near the pass out level.


As for buying a car, if you buy it without a warranty and did not get it checked out by a mechanic before purchase you are typically SOL.

This woman voluntarily engaged in sex, and rapidly so from what the reports say. She did not require alot of convincing to get her to have sex (a few minutes).

This was not rape, it was not a crime.

It was just voluntary sex by two people, one who regreted it after because either the guy was married or because he was arabic
 
This was not rape, it was not a crime.

My apologizes, I did not realize your extensive knowledge of Israeli law. Well, if there is no Israeli law stating that sex by deception is rape then I absolutely agree with you, its not a crime. Thanks for clearing it up.
 
My apologizes, I did not realize your extensive knowledge of Israeli law. Well, if there is no Israeli law stating that sex by deception is rape then I absolutely agree with you, its not a crime. Thanks for clearing it up.

It might be against the law but it was not a crime
 
So you're using "Crime" as in a crime against nature or more coloquiel use such as "its a crime she's wearing white after labor day" and not, you know, the commonly used term when discussing legal issues which is violating a LAW or engaging in criminal activity which is violating the authority of the state. Is this what you're saying? Do you routinely use crime in this fashion when taking about a situation which is discussing legality?
 
So you're using "Crime" as in a crime against nature or more coloquiel use such as "its a crime she's wearing white after labor day" and not, you know, the commonly used term when discussing legal issues which is violating a LAW or engaging in criminal activity which is violating the authority of the state. Is this what you're saying? Do you routinely use crime in this fashion when taking about a situation which is discussing legality?

In this particular case I am.
It is a stupid law, and a stupid law may make something illegal, but not a crime as such

If the government made wearing blue shirts illegal I would not consider it to be a crime to wear a blue shirt, lieing to get sex might be illegal but it certainly is not a crime
 
I guess it depends on what you mean by "consent." Is it more important that she consented to having sex with the man? Or is it more important that she consented to having sex with the Arab man claiming to be Jewish? Personally I think the man should be jailed. Obviously she would have changed her mind if the man wasn't a Jew. She consented to having sex with the "Jewish" man, not the lying Arab guy. I think it's a violation of women's rights and abuse to allow people to lie and seduce others into having sex.

Maybe she should be sentenced to jail for being a "blonde". :mrgreen:
 
I guess what I'm saying is while I think that'd make little sense in our society, I could very easily see it in another culture and without knowing more information it'd be hard for me to say if its "wrong" or not for this man to be charged.

Okay, so let's take the same approach with honor killings in other countries.

:D
 
Okay, so let's take the same approach with honor killings in other countries.

:D

Oh, there's absolutely nothing criminal about honor killings in countries that have it. If its legal, its not a crime to do so. It may be wrong, immoral, unethetical, or contrary to human decency, but its not illegal and thus a crime.

I'm not saying that this law or the fact he's being charged is moral, ethical, decent, or correct. What I am saying is that its ambiguous enough of a thing that I do not see it as a black and white type issue (where as I do with regards to honor killings) to say definitely its wrong or not. I view it very similarly to the Alcohol Rape sentiment here in the West, and as such can very easily see how a society can view that as "non-consent" and while I may not agree I'm not sure I find that as morally disgusting as say, killing a daughter because she slept with another woman.

In one case, someone did something unquestionably wrong, lying to someone else in order to get sex. That's wrong. I don't care if you say its common, I don't care if you want to play the "She had it coming" or "she was easy" card, it is wrong to lie to get sex. Does that mean people don't do it? Oh **** no, it happens all the time. That doesn't magically make it right. Does it necessarily warrant criminal action? In my mind no, but I don't think its any more unreasonable then our own laws with regards to alcohol many times in regards to sex, so I can see how culturally it could come to be and be okay with it.

In the other case someone was not doing anything wrong save for having a different sexual preference and acting on said preference, and was killed for it. There's nothing I can equate that to or even grasp to begin to understand it to be able to have any kind of moral ambiguity in regards to my feelings on it.

In both cases I'm speaking about you have an individual that consents to sex, doing so under a false view of reality (Altered state of mind in regards to Alcohol, altered view of the person in regards to the lying). In both cases its almost impossible to PROVE that the person would've acted differently had that false view of reality not been there (IE would the girl have still slept with him if sober? If she knew he was musliM). Due to the near inability to "prove" that in general the doubt goes in the way of the accuser.

Is lying about being a Muslim instead of a Jew relatively light? Yes, though I'd say it may be a bit more of an issue over there. But then again, most women can still understand fully that they're choosing to **** a guy after 3 beers and yet that can still be used to convict a guy on rape. I just don't find my moral outrage raising to a higher level over this than it does over "rape" of someone that's buzzed.
 


Gangs of Israeli jews outside clubs keeping muslim men from loving Israeli women.




...where da white women at?
 
Oh, there's absolutely nothing criminal about honor killings in countries that have it. If its legal, its not a crime to do so. It may be wrong, immoral, unethetical, or contrary to human decency, but its not illegal and thus a crime.

I'm snipping out most of the rest of your post because I think I get it.

Personally, I think it should be more of a civil law issue. When you lie to someone, you're setting up a social contract with them that things are a certain way that you describe them; when the truth is discovered, the contract is found to be null and void, and damages can be sought.

2 years of house arrest and another year and a half in prison after that are, to me, far in excess of an acceptable consequence for lying to someone who was not acting in an official capacity while not under an oath to tell the truth.

I view it very similarly to the Alcohol Rape sentiment here in the West, and as such can very easily see how a society can view that as "non-consent"

Except that in the case of intoxication, the argument is about whether or not the victim was able to give consent; in the case of deception, the victim was in possession of their faculties, which again in my mind makes it a civil thing and not a criminal thing.

In one case, someone did something unquestionably wrong, lying to someone else in order to get sex. That's wrong.

Here we are in agreement 100%.
 
Except that in the case of intoxication, the argument is about whether or not the victim was able to give consent; in the case of deception, the victim was in possession of their faculties, which again in my mind makes it a civil thing and not a criminal thing.

Ditto on the snipping, and I agree I think personally I'd prefer it as a civil issue.

But that's the thing, the issue with Alcohol is NOT about whether or not the Victim can give consent but whether or not that consent is made with a clear mind and unimpaired.

A drunk person can most definitely still go "**** me" or "I want to have sex with you" or "Yes I want to have sex". You can't say its na issue of not being able to consent because that right there is consent. Its an issue of whether or not society views that as legitimate consent due to an imparied view of reality due to the affects alcohol has on someone.

Similarly, one could view being decieved as having a similar unclear or unimpaired view of the situation that they're consenting to. One could argue that nothing FORCES you to believe the lies or not verify the lies, but similarly there is nothing forcing you to get so intoxicated that you can not make reasonable decisions either.

In either case someone is functioning under a misconception, either chemical as the alcohol lowers the inhibitions through its interactions with the body or mentally as the individual is decieved into believing the person is something they're not, and that misconception supposedly helps lead to the sex happening. In both cases its one persons word against another that its that particular misconception that caused it. Based on the amount of time it took for her to sleep with him one could argue that she probably would've regardless and she's crying rape now to save face. However similar things happen when a college girl after 3 beers sleeps with someone way down on the social ladder from her and realizes the next morning that everyones going to know she stayed with him and she's going to get made fun of/ostracized, so cries "rape". Our society doesn't seem to see anything that "immoral" about the alcohol laws because some people take advantage of it in situations it shouldn't be taken advantage of....I don't see much difference here.
 
To re-post my post from this thread:

I've just read a response from one of the judicial officials to the criticism that was aimed towards the three judges that ruled over the guy's case, that really sets things into perspectives and has made me reexamine my opinion about their decision.

Apparently the Israeli-Arab, a married man, has engaged in sexual intercourse with this woman under the claim that he was a Jewish bachelor, a single man looking for a long-standing relationship with her. (Which is kinda hilarious considering how fast the female has let him into her bed)
About one month and a half later, the female has filed charges against the man, claiming that she wouldn't have agreed to have sex with him if she'd have known he's a married Arab man looking for a one-night stand with her.

The actual problem, according to this judicial official, that has led to this controversial ruling, was the fact that the accused man has settled for a plea bargain, and has given a confession. The judicial system is not involved in the negotiations, the plea bargain, and the judges could only accept the confession and make the ruling in accordance with the law.

To quote the judicial official; "We must emphasize that the court was not required to reach a decision on the case, but has only accepted the defendant's confession after a few corrections of certain facts in the indictment by the persecution. The court is not involved in the negotiations for a plea bargain, and it's important that the public would realize that".

The official goes on to say that "After the plea bargain, as it was agreed on between the two parties, was filed and Cashuar's confession on rape was handed, the meaning of his confession was well-explained to him by the court and he was told that the maximal punishment for rape is 16 years and the minimal is 4 years."

In other words, this judicial official says that the fault and criticism from the public should be directed towards those who have agreed on that plea deal, and not on the judges who could only accept his confession and act in accordance with the law, as far as the law is concerned.

I personally think that this law should be removed from the face of Earth, with no relation to this specific case. It is one of those bra-burning lesbians laws that only seeks to empower the "weakened" female gender, as if they don't already rule the world abusing the human past.
It's like the law that says that if a man sleeps with a drunk woman he's raping her. (and it doesn't work the other way around)
Actually, if I'm not wrong, there is a law that states that if a drunk male sleeps with a drunk female he might be accused with rape as well.

On other news, and in the same theme, minister Limor Livnat has stated that she would vote against the adding of two new members to the Turkel committee, after it was declared that the two added members would be males, making it a committee of 7 male individuals.
She says that she finds the fact that there is no woman in that committee to be a discrimination against the female gender.

Here's the article:
Minister Livnat: Turkel's request chauvinistic - Israel News, Ynetnews
 


Gangs of Israeli jews outside clubs keeping muslim men from loving Israeli women.




...where da white women at?


The best part of that video was when it said the judge had an "obligation to protect the public from sophisticated criminals" :lol:

If lying about yourself to get a girl in the sack is "sophisticated" then Drunken College kids set the bar for sophistication.
 
This issue is a sticky one. Is the conviction proper, or was the Arab man wrongfully convicted of rape? Personally, I believe no criminal charges should have been filed, but there is definitely a civil suit here for misrepresentation.

What would it be like in America if Rape by Deception was a crime? Just think of all those guys at McDonald's, who tell women that they are scientists or corporate executives, that would be in prison right now. That could be at least 20% of everybody who posts on the internet. LOL.

Seriously, though, what do you think?

Article is here.

There's got to be more to the story, if not then it should be overturned on appeal.
 
My apologizes, I did not realize your extensive knowledge of Israeli law. Well, if there is no Israeli law stating that sex by deception is rape then I absolutely agree with you, its not a crime. Thanks for clearing it up.

CNN-International reported earlier today that Jewish men have been punished under similar rules. However, the report did not elucidate as to what rules/laws were in question...
 
Back
Top Bottom