Difference between revisions of "Translations:Is the premarital unchastity case of Deut. 22:13 an example of the justice system assuming guilt until a defendant proves her innocence?/4/pt"

Latest revision as of 02:00, 1 December 2020

Information about message (contribute)

This message has no documentation. If you know where or how this message is used, you can help other translators by adding documentation to this message.

Message definition (Is the premarital unchastity case of Deut. 22:13 an example of the justice system assuming guilt until a defendant proves her innocence?)

In the first case (the father accusing the husband of slander), the "signs of virginity" will guarantee that the father wins, given that the husband has no real (eyewitness) evidence, and is just publicly slandering the daughter. If the father chose not to keep such "signs," then it would only mean that he couldn't successfully prosecute the husband for slander.

In the first case (the father accusing the husband of slander), the "signs of virginity" will guarantee that the father wins, given that the husband has no real (eyewitness) evidence, and is just publicly slandering the daughter. If the father chose not to keep such "signs," then it would only mean that he couldn't successfully prosecute the husband for slander.

TranslationNo primeiro caso (o pai acusando o marido de calúnia), os "sinais de virgindade" garantirão que o pai ganha, dado que o marido não tem provas reais (testemunha ocular), e está apenas a caluniar publicamente a filha. Se o pai optasse por não guardar tais "sinais", então isso significaria apenas que não poderia processar o marido por calúnia.

No primeiro caso (o pai acusando o marido de calúnia), os "sinais de virgindade" garantirão que o pai ganha, dado que o marido não tem provas reais (testemunha ocular), e está apenas a caluniar publicamente a filha. Se o pai optasse por não guardar tais "sinais", então isso significaria apenas que não poderia processar o marido por calúnia.