Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

[Town Heretic]

It seems you've edited slightly?

Yes. :chuckle: I was reading genuineoriginal and thinking about that as I started in on my response to you and the first part reflected that. When I realized it was you and I'd cross pollinated I hit the edit button hard. Mea culpa.

What's important is when one person says no, the other person respects their right to say no. And on this, of course we have no disagreement at all.

:cheers: I'd hope the amended would meet with your approval. I think when we marry we agree to be emotionally and physically available with one another, but I also believe that both of those are subject to human nature, that there will be times in a marriage, instances or periods, where one or both may be unable to meet those obligations for entirely understandable reasons and the other spouse should respond in love and consideration.

If the problems of alienation, emotionally or physically, persist, then it should be a matter of counselling and dialogue to resolve whatever issue is interfering in the relationship.

 

[ok doser]

.. I've essentially covered the topic.

without referring to scripture

bravo

 

[Town Heretic]

without referring to scripture
bravo

If anna has a problem with my not feeling obliged to reference scripture in making a point no one with a moral compass should have difficulty in understanding regarding the morality of the issue then I'm sure she'll mention it.

Now be a good fellow and find a car to chase.

 

[ok doser]

Now be a good fellow and find a car to chase.

:think:

 

[annabenedetti]

Yes. :chuckle: I was reading genuineoriginal and thinking about that as I started in on my response to you and the first part reflected that. When I realized it was you and I'd cross pollinated I hit the edit button hard. Mea culpa.

I was wondering... :chuckle:

:cheers: I'd hope the amended would meet with your approval. I think when we marry we agree to be emotionally and physically available with one another, but I also believe that both of those are subject to human nature, that there will be times in a marriage, instances or periods, where one or both may be unable to meet those obligations for entirely understandable reasons and the other spouse should respond in love and consideration.

If the problems of alienation, emotionally or physically, persist, then it should be a matter of counselling and dialogue to resolve whatever issue is interfering in the relationship.

Again I agree with you in the spirit of it, but in the actuality - a husband who sees nothing wrong with forcing himself on his wife isn't likely to be open to counseling.

Anyway. Thank you for your input.

 

[annabenedetti]

If anna has a problem with my not feeling obliged to reference scripture in making a point no one with a moral compass should have difficulty in understanding regarding the morality of the issue then I'm sure she'll mention it.

Now be a good fellow and find a car to chase.

No problem at all, so nothing to mention. :e4e:

 

[annabenedetti]

:think:

You edited your post because you originally replied to TH with "be a good fellow and find an ambulance to chase," and you realized it was problematic after you went and tattled on TH to Sherman - so you came back here and made your almost identical post disappear. Because optics and all....

That's just so pathetic.

 

[ok doser]

... a husband who sees nothing wrong with forcing himself on his wife ...

why do you assume it would be the husband forcing himself on the wife?

 

[CabinetMaker]

...
It was properly addressed by the law for many centuries.
It is a matter of contract law, not criminal law.

"The husband cannot be guilty of a rape committed by himself upon his lawful wife, for by their mutual consent and contract the wife hath given up herself in this kind unto her husband, which she cannot retract".
Sir Matthew Hale, History of the Pleas of the Crown, 1736​

Here is what Paul taught about marriage:

[h=1]Ephesians 5:25-30 New International Version (NIV)[/h] ²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her ²⁶ to make her holy, cleansing^[a] her by the washing with water through the word, ²⁷ and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. ²⁸ In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹ After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— ³⁰ for we are members of his body.

GO, would Jesus have EVER "raped" His church? Men are to love their wives as Christ loved His church. Jesus died for His church that it would be redeemed to His Father in Heaven.

 

[CabinetMaker]

why do you assume it would be the husband forcing himself on the wife?

While considerably more rare, were a wife to force her husband to have sex against his will, she would be guilty of rape as well.

 

[annabenedetti]

why do you assume it would be the husband forcing himself on the wife?

Going with probability. You do the math.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The idea that "all sex within the marriage is consensual," and so there can be "no rape at all in a marriage" is vile.

No, the idea is not vile.
What is vile is the way sex within marriage has been weaponized by feminists by allowing them to falsely accuse their husbands of the criminal offense of rape.

 

[genuineoriginal]

No, a marriage liscense and saying vows does not make forced sex, rape, permissible in a marriage.

Sex within marriage is never rape.

What kind of idiot thinks forcing a woman to have sex against her will is a valid expression of Christ in their life?

Is that how you think?

I stated previously:

A husband or a wife that tries to force their spouse into having sex with them or who intentionally withholds sex from their spouse is violating the contract of marriage.
Either of these is a contractual matter that needs to be dealt with in civil court not a criminal matter that needs to be dealt with in criminal court.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Sex within marriage is never rape.

Unless it is. If a husband forces his wife to have sex with him against her will, it is rape. Force includes physical force and/or emotional force.

Is that how you think?

No. It is, however, what you said.

I stated previously:

A marriage contract DOES NOT convey the right to either party to physically/verbally/emotionally assault the other. That you think it does is an incredibly poor witness for Christ.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What kind of idiot thinks forcing a woman to have sex against her will is a valid expression of Christ in their life?

Is that how you think?

No. It is, however, what you said.

I never said that.

My argument is that feminists have redefined "rape" to include sex between a husband and wife in order to destroy the institution of marriage.

I have never made the argument that a person is serving Christ by forcing a woman to have sex against her will.
That argument came solely from your own mind.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I never said that.

My argument is that feminists have redefined "rape" to include sex between a husband and wife in order to destroy the institution of marriage.

I think you are either naive or willfully ignorant. Do you honestly think that no man ever forces his wife to have sex with him against her will?

 

[genuineoriginal]

A marriage contract DOES NOT convey the right to either party to physically/verbally/emotionally assault the other.
That you think it does is an incredibly poor witness for Christ.

That argument came solely from your own mind, not from anything I said, which says a lot about the way you think.

I claim that either party who physically/verbally/emotionally assaults the other party is in violation of the marriage contract.

 

[CabinetMaker]

That argument came solely from your own mind, not from anything I said, which says a lot about the way you think.

I claim that either party who physically/verbally/emotionally assaults the other party is in violation of the marriage contract.

They are also in violation of the law. They are also in violation of God's moral code.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I think you are either naive or willfully ignorant.

I think you have been deceived by the teachings of our society.

Do you honestly think that no man ever forces his wife to have sex with him against her will?

There are many things that happen in a marriage that are between the husband and the wife alone.
People like you and annabenedetti who think they have the right to know what goes on in the bedrooms of a married couple are vile.

 

[genuineoriginal]

They are also in violation of the law.

Only because feminists have redefined "rape" to include sex within a marriage to destroy the institution of marriage.

They are also in violation of God's moral code.

Homosexuals are also in violation of God's moral code, but you support homosexuals practicing their abominations.