5

There is a more than one month old question on this site which is ripping apart the ethical liability/morality of this site.

It's the case of the weird victim-blaming with religious backing. It did get 10 downvotes but failed to get close it seems.

But my question is should we entertain such questions?

As it seems OP is asking for religious-based backing for rape, which is purely disgusting.

And if we want to close it then which reason?

I am not asking from user perspective like this meta but want to know from site point of view.

| |
  • 1
    I remember seeing close votes. But close votes time period went off as no 5 users made it. – Parabrahman Jyoti Sep 17 '19 at 10:37
  • @ParabrahmanJyoti I have started the close vote chain again, let's see – Ankit Sharma Sep 17 '19 at 11:02
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of Should users on this forum declare they will act on their beliefs? – sv. Sep 19 '19 at 3:57
  • 1
    Such content should not be allowed / entertained as we aren't aware of the readers / OPs understanding by reading others' opinions (answers or comments). It is better to remove such content, IMO. request to close asap. – Mr_Green Sep 19 '19 at 12:08
  • 1
    @mods Please take action. – Mr_Green Sep 19 '19 at 12:09
  • 2
    I think the downvoters here and the upvoters there had never seen these posts neither from a human perspective nor from our religion perspective. The last point of that question says simply using up the punya already in his account? uff! – Krishna Shweta Sep 19 '19 at 15:03
  • @KrishnaShweta at least the question is closed now for god sake. – Ankit Sharma Sep 19 '19 at 15:06
  • 2
    @AnkitSharma surprised to see three downvotes. Certainly i am out of words to express my anger on this downvoters! – Parabrahman Jyoti Sep 19 '19 at 15:26
  • 2
    More discussion posts = more unanswered questions on meta. Your question may remain unanswered. – Sarvabhouma Sep 19 '19 at 18:57
  • 1
    I've tried to fix the issue by replacing the rude/offensive example by general one. – Pandya Sep 20 '19 at 9:10
  • 2
    @Paṇḍyā I don't think there will be a general example for such questions. The question stands offensive no matter how much edition is done. If you have other opinion on this, please share your thoughts. IMO, lets not discuss on the stuff which stands wrong. FYI, the OP wants to know as an assurance. Look out his other questions as well. – Mr_Green Sep 20 '19 at 9:22
  • 1
    @AnkitSharma Yes, this may be a question want to know how the law of karma works in this example. – Pandya Sep 20 '19 at 9:27
  • 2
    @Paṇḍyā intention is pretty clear, which can't be covered behind karma. It's clearly justifying rape based on victim's past life karma. – Ankit Sharma Sep 20 '19 at 9:29
  • 1
    @sv. because SE works by community. – Ankit Sharma Oct 2 '19 at 17:35
  • 1
    @Ankit you are right. See the answer. – Pandya Oct 26 '19 at 15:00
4

Let's not allow to back any such illegal activities, when asked for assurance, by giving explanation from our scriptures. It is better to immediately close such posts as off-topic.

If we are discussing on such stuff then definitely there will be answers/comments with both positive and negative. And we don't know what points the users are grasping. Lets avoid any possibility of encouraging illegal activities as much as possible.

Conclusion

Discussion on current illegal activities for assurance must be off-topic.

| |
  • 'Discussion on current illegal activities' - I'm just curious, do you consider the practice of Sati illegal? – sv. Sep 20 '19 at 16:10
  • 2
    Ofcouse, If a person is asking questions like "Why shouldn't we follow sati now?" or "What is the actual procedure to perform Sati?" will definitely mark it as off-topic. – Mr_Green Sep 21 '19 at 6:21
  • 1
    ^ The above questions are clearly encouraging which is currently illegal. – Mr_Green Sep 21 '19 at 6:22
  • 1
    @sv. yes sati is illegal , so does rape and murder – Ankit Sharma Sep 21 '19 at 6:44
  • @sv. Do check my comments in chatroom. – Mr_Green Sep 21 '19 at 6:56
  • 1
    What you two are proposing is censorship. As I've stated in my answer other SE sites don't like censorship. We should adopt the same policy here. This is a Q&A site about Hinduism and not a site maintained by Hindus for Hindus. If this site wants to attract users that write quality answers, other than adhering to the Code of Conduct, we shouldn't be doing censorship of any kind. Think coolly without getting emotional. – sv. Sep 24 '19 at 1:57
  • 1
    @AnkitSharma What you are forgetting is, Sati was once legal in India. There are many answers here that still support Sati using scriptures. See example1 and example 2. It doesn't mean people will start Sati again after reading those answers. We need to keep emotion out when making site policies. – sv. Sep 24 '19 at 2:02
  • 1
    Re: your chat comment, "My view lets keep it Q&A but with rich consideration of documenting our religion in the best possible way" - This is a Q&A site, main focus being answering OP's doubts/questions. So I don't understand what you mean by "documenting our religion in the best possible way" - there are questions and there are answers to those questions, we are not a replacement to Wikipedia on Hinduism. – sv. Sep 24 '19 at 2:06
  • 1
    @sv. if you forgetting we are talking about RAPE here which was never legal. You bring sati out of nowhere but but asker clearly trying to justify rape and you want us to support him for some reason I am not understanding, – Ankit Sharma Sep 24 '19 at 2:49
  • 1
    @AnkitSharma "if you forgetting we are talking about RAPE here which was never legal" - sorry to disappoint you, we once had two forms of "marriage" called, Rakshasa and Paishacha as discussed under this post. Now I can only imagine what else went on during these "marriages." – sv. Sep 24 '19 at 3:29
  • 1
    "You bring sati out of nowhere" - not out of nowhere, this answer is specifically talking about "current illegal activities" and Sati is currently illegal. Does it mean we want to avoid any and all discussions on Sati because some crazy user now wants to justify and commit Sati after reading a post here?! Anyway, I'm done debating on this topic with you two. One mod has voted to leave the question open in its original form. Another mod edits and remove 'rape'...still doesn't make you happy. Good luck with your censorship efforts on the site. @AnkitSharma – sv. Sep 24 '19 at 3:35
  • 1
    @sv. I hope you can use this argument in Indian court :D – Ankit Sharma Sep 24 '19 at 4:50
  • @sv. I am not saying we should not discuss rape or sati. I am saying we should mark the posts off topic if it is for example asking for assurance on rape or sati (when intentions are clear, why to support?). Other than this context, they(rape or sati or any illegal stuff) are welcome. Also, I don't mean to document the Hinduism as wikipedia does - I don't think wiki is even near to what we are building here in Q&A from genuine scriptural references. – Mr_Green Sep 24 '19 at 6:04
  • 2
    @mods do please not vote to reopen such posts without getting a finalized result from this discussion. If you feel otherwise, do please share your thoughts but don't act without finalizing this discussion. – Mr_Green Sep 24 '19 at 6:09
  • 1
    @sv. there are no hidden words, it's clearout justifying rape. – Ankit Sharma Sep 26 '19 at 2:54
2

(After 3rd revision) Both sides were seeming to be right.

Side 1) Those who were thinking that question is fine as in understanding law of Karma.
Side 2) Those who were thinking that question is faulty and offensive as explained in question.

Initially I tried to salvage the question by replacing offensive example illustrated in the question thinking that it may be the case that questioner is confused and is trying to understand the law of Karma, a good answer can clear the confusion.

But after critically thinking from both the sides again, I got that the motive behind posting question is not looking like a try to understand the law of Karma. The motive does sound of intentionally justifying the crime to be in line of law of Karma.

We know that everything we experience is the result of our Karma but at the same time, what we are doing is purely in our hands. If the motive of questioner was to understand the law of Karma, the question should not have be framed in the way it was.

Thus it is the right decision to close and delete the question. This type of ambiguous questions may take some time before direct deletion due to possible delay (by community/users/mods) in detection of ill motive unlike obvious rude/offensive questions which usually gets purged quickly. Flag this type of question as rude/offensive or better as custom flag explaining the problem with the question. We'll find a way to remove it.

| |
  • FYI, Philosophy.SE has no problem accepting the same question. Please check with @PhilipKlöcking and other mods in TL why they disagree with you on this. IMO, downvoting a question is fine but deleting a question is censorship. I think mods should try to uphold SE policy instead of succumbing to majoritarianism. One of the mods here has already voted to keep the question open in its original form. I don't know his reasons for not speaking up. – sv. Oct 26 '19 at 23:02
  • 1
    @sv. Different sites have different mindset. – Ankit Sharma Oct 27 '19 at 4:32
-5

No, since the site doesn't judge its users or dictate their views, it has no moral responsibility towards how content posted on this site is used by OP and others.

One user said the following on a similar post about controversial answers and I think the same applies to controversial questions like the one you linked.

I'd finish by saying that it's the internet - and what you're asking is unenforceable. I try to give answers in good faith but it isn't necessarily what I believe in - just what I think is the best answer, referencing what seems appropriate to the question asked. If something's clearly offensive we have other methods - like flags.

This has been already stated many times on this site but I will repeat it here: If one doesn't like a question, they can simply downvote and move on.

Trying to close valid objective questions somehow just because you don't like them is censorship and against the principles of SE.

As it seems OP is asking for religious-based backing for rape, which is purely disgusting...

That's just your personal opinion. OP makes a lengthy argument in the question but you choose to ignore all that and hang on to just one potential problem with the question that, what if someone writes an answer defending rape using the karma theory. And you want to censor such answers. Worse still some users are even downvoting the only answer posted in an effort to delete both the question and answer from the site.

As another CM says on a different post here, always assume best intentions of OP and don't jump to conclusions. She's probably referring to these posts on Parenting SE:

Hopefully, users here can learn a thing or two about close-voting from these posts.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .