AGIR believes you can stay out of trouble (rape, I presume) if:
"a) You moved in circles which celibrated purity, honesty and true love.
b) Regularly reinforced those values with others who shared them.
Bad things still happen to Christians, but the chances and probability are far less... of that you can be sure"

Who can be sure AGIR? You?
Where on earth would you get such a bizarre notion from?
Do you have any proof that Christians are less likely to be raped or have 'bad things' happen to them AGIR?

Of course, these Christians would also have to be pure and honest, and share these values with other like-minded Christians?

You mean like priests and Christian Brothers AGIR? Surely you couldn't get anyone more 'pure' or honest than these Christian men?
Yet some of these guys raped children AGIR!

If you are suggesting it is the women who should be 'pure' etc, in order to avoid being raped, well what about all those nuns who have been raped in vast numbers in some countries of our world?
Did they 'deserve' it?

No person 'deserves' to be raped, ever.

Christians don't have a monopoly on morality in our world, and to suggest they do is really naive.

Christian people are no more or no less likely to do 'bad things' to other people than anyone else.

Roscop <many years ago I read an article in the Waikato Times NZ
Which said the Hamilton police did an analysis of reported sexual/assualt rape cases. It revealed that 30% of allegations were proven to be false.

Like the high profile Johns case. Like the Mrs. Brimble case.
You could say those allegations were proven to be false in a court of law too.
However there are a lot of people out here who thought the evidence actually pointed to the accusations being true. I don’t want to hijack this thread to get into more debates about those cases because we have had those debates before. I will just say however that one of the men in the Brimble case had been let off by a previous jury on a charge of rape. The jury in the Brimble Case of course weren’t allowed to know his past history as is the procedure in rape cases.

I think that there would probably be a percentage similar to 30% of rape not being able to be proven in this country also. In other words a lot of rapists walk free. I’m not saying false accusations don’t happen but I think they would be in a fairly small percentage compared to the percentage of rapes that actually do happen and justice never gets done.

I think Elizabeth is a little bit nieve. Most women in their right mind have nothing to gain from crying rape and would rather run a thousand miles than to have to go to court and discuss sexual details. There will always be exceptions. The reality is however that those exceptions are much less the norm than men committing rape blaming the woman and getting away with it.

Cherful, you misunderstood what I said about the Hamilton police findings ie 30% of allegations were proven (repeat proven) to be false eg the maker of the allegations confessed to them being false or there was other substantive evidence that showed they were false. It said nothing about “30% of rape not being able to be proven”.

<Cherful, you misunderstood what I said about the Hamilton police findings ie 30% of allegations were proven (repeat proven) to be false eg the maker of the allegations confessed to them being false or there was other substantive evidence that showed they were false. It said nothing about “30% of rape not being able to be proven”.Posted by Roscop, Sunday, 13 February 2011 2:43:45 AM>

Interesting!

Notice how the 30% gets turned from 'false allegations' to 'not able to be proven'.

Of course when an allegation of an offense is false, then the offense will not able to proven, without a real miscarriage of justice.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/laws-of-attraction-20110212-1ar79.html

Typically in Australia the laws relating to consent have been changed to improve convictions rates.

Convicting and punishing people after an offense has been committed, does not one thing to prevent the offense from occuring in the first place.

AGIR, post points out how what is said can then be taken and the meaning changed, to do a bit of guilt tripping.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bY4uoDV_pU

This ad has left me somewhat stunned.