I'm adding this one to the pile I point to when someone naively says "What's the harm in letting people have their beliefs?".

The only problem with that here is that we are dealing with that particularly difficult, and vile form of illegality that is rape.

You see, you are saying "This is simple: something illegal happened", but the trouble with rape, as opposed to theft or murder, is that the victim has to feel raped in order for an illegality to have taken place. Sex is not illegal.

And in this case, the poor woman wasn't ready to face the fact that she had been raped before she lost her faith. Only because her sister survived 2004 did she realize that something was wrong.

What if her sister had, by coincidence, died in 2004? Then the woman would have been reafirmed in her faith, and maybe she would still be the personal sex-slave of these two vile con-men, caught in a torture chamber of her own fear and self-delusions. That is the objection to faith here. Not the illegality of the rape. That is wrong regardless of faith.

Had she, and the men been atheists, it would still be wrong.

But had she been atheist this particular scenario could not have played out the way it did. Sure she could still fall victim to other terrible crimes, but in this case, her faith is also partly to blame.

It's not an attempt to shift blame to say that her uncritical acceptance of thier offer made her vulnerable. The sick fucks were no less criminal for her vulnerability.

But had she been a critical thinker, she would have been more likley to tell the two to piss off. It's not being an atheist or not that's the important bit, it's being able to critically examine ideas.

Kinda hard to get payed to rape her that way... but to each there own

The only objection I have to what you say is "these sick fucks would only need to identify a different fear"

I don't believe that it's only a question of finding a fear and exploiting it. Many many people aren't in posession of a fear strong enough to be exploited in such a way.

So the question has to be, what could cause a fear so strong as to result in such intense vulnerability?

Now in the case of this poor woman, to be exploited so horribly, and to continue this for years, requires more than just superstition. I'll be the first to admit that. One must assume that she has bigger issues than simply the irrational belief in curses. but none the less, it must have been a factor, since, as she realized the men couldn't be totally right (when her sister survived 2004), this was the moment when she finally tried to free herself of the men.

And like I said, imagine her sister had coincidently died in 2004, is it not possible that she would still be in that abusive relationship, or at least have taken alot longer to finally break free?

The point is, critically examining her own beliefs in the light of new evidence was instrumental in saving her, because, (according to the article at least) it was the moment when she realized her sister living past 2004 meant something had to be wrong that she finally did something about it.

I would never imply that every single theist in the world could fall victim to the same crime. Regardless of any superstitious beliefs a person might hold, the majority would of course just tell these men to "fuck off" like Jill put it.

But even so, lack of critical thinking, lack of trust in one's own judgement, and considering faith a virtue was instrumental in hurting this poor woman.

And lack of critical thinking, lack of trust in one's own judgement (I trust in/give myself over to God), and considering faith a virtue is something that even non-vulnerable, smart, happy theists often espouse, and I for one think this story is one that should give theists pause, regardless of the fact that they know perfectly well that they could not fall victim to this crime.

They should enjoy themselves with "Bubba" for a few years if they think rape is something good.

Then again, when we take the emotional weight off of this, is it really true that most theists would not fall victim to this type of manipulation?  Notice I said manipulation, not crime.  It's easy to say that most women are smart enough to know not to pay people to rape them.  However, the point of this article is not the rape.  Lots of women get raped.  It's about how she was raped.

So, let's ask ourselves, is it a crime to take money from people by promising them benefits for money, and then not delivering on the promise?  The government says it is:

So, now let's ask... how many people have listened to a sermon on tithing and then ponied up 10% of their paycheck?  What were they promised?  In some cases, they were promised that their faith in God would produce tangible results in their life -- anything from financial success to cures for illness to a better place in heaven.  In my own life, I've heard probably fifty such sermons promising a wide range of things if only we'll give our money to God.

First off, if I'm giving my money to God, I'd like a receipt signed by the recipient, thank you.  Do any churches have any documents showing that God actually received any of the tithe money?  Is there a signed contract on record where God gives churches power of attorney to act on his behalf?

I think not.

Granted, not all churches do this, but some do.  Anybody who believes such claims and gives their money away has had a crime perpetrated against them.  My grandmother has been giving 10% of her income to the church for fifty fucking years!  She firmly believes that God is slipping her some preferential treatment as a way of saying thanks.

Rape triggers our emotional centers much more than fraud, but the church has been regularly committing fraud, and not only do they not get prosecuted, they get special treatment by the IRS.  Maybe most people aren't as above deception as they think.

Allow me to second this, and offer a cautionary tale:

When I got out of high school, the friends I had at the time were punk-rockers with a rather 'Me-centric' philosophy regarding the world. One of them - whom I'll refer to by his nickname, Hunter - took-up the hobby of fucking Christian girls (ones who had boyfriends, for the extra challenge and amusement, were the prime targets).

The method was extremely simple: scout the room for said girl, convince her using a sincere-sounding bullshit story that it was somehow 'destiny' that she and him had been brought together that evening, get her to pick-up the drink tab and take her home for the night.

The hobby yielded lucrative results. I don't recall Hunter ever going home 'empty-handed' when he was out to play his game.

Now, because (unlike Dylan) I actually do care about the average person's feelings to some extent, I can't say I (or anyone in the same boat as me) would be able to play on people's beliefs as effectively as described - but that's not the point. The point is that people like Dylan (or more monstrous people like those mentioned in the OP) are enabled by the grotesque beliefs that theists hold, and it only makes them that much more influential when you refuse to see how your judgement has been poisoned.

Kinda like these guys played on people's fears:

And what about the countless priests and "good" Xian folk who have threatened little children and adults over the centuries?

I agree: Sick fucks.