Philosophy Now Forum

‘One should never strike a woman; not even with a flower.' (Hindu. Janet, i. https://archive.org/stream/TheAbolition ... n_djvu.txt (See Appendix, "7 Law of Mercy")

http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/08/ray-rice- ... nch-video/

Is absolute non-violence against women a true and justified moral absolute?

Or are there some exceptions?

"Is absolute non-violence against women a true and justified moral absolute?"

Of course not.

If she's comin' at you with a knife, you best defend yourself.

#

Three issues...

Rice's 'domestic violence': since his wife has 'forgiven' him, the rest of the world needs to shut the hell up and go about its business.

Rice's termination (from the team and all endorsements): these are contractual matters...if Rice violated contracts then, boo hoo for him...if the team and endorsers released Rice without an agreed-upon policy for such things in place then, Rice can seek redress in the courts.

'Domestic violence' (in general): I'm guessin' a fat percentage of what's reported is (like many reports of rape) not actually violence of man against woman, but a simple yanking of the man's leash by the woman.

Not sayin' men don't beat up and rape women...'am' sayin' that many of these accusations are horseshit.

tbieter wrote:‘One should never strike a woman; not even with a flower.' (Hindu. Janet, i. https://archive.org/stream/TheAbolition ... n_djvu.txt (See Appendix, "7 Law of Mercy")

http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/08/ray-rice- ... nch-video/

Is absolute non-violence against women a true and justified moral absolute?

Or are there some exceptions?

There's always exceptions, it's no different that "thou shalt not kill!", yet we kill happily for millennia!

If a woman is a mass murdere, is insane and will harm others, etc.