ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
and all three of us are engaging in the conversation
you, on the other hand, refuse to answer direct questions put to you
i wonder why that is?
Is marital rape scripturally defensible?
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
- Status
and all three of us are engaging in the conversation
you, on the other hand, refuse to answer direct questions put to you
i wonder why that is?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
genuineoriginal
New member
Yes, to a point.
The wedding and divorce of the relationship are public matters.
Anything related to the divorce also becomes a public matter.
Additionally, there is a historical precedent for allowing the male kinfolk of the woman the ability to beat some sense into the husband if he is physically abusive, but this has also become criminalized and no longer can be done.
Likewise, the female kinfolk of the man would take the wife and talk to her if they believed she wasn't upholding her end of the marriage.
In both of these solutions, any problems in the relationship was kept within the family and no criminal court was involved.
I addressed this point.
Anything that causes the married couple to become a plaintiff and a defendant in a criminal case should automatically cause the two to become divorced, and the final disposition of the divorce is dependent on the outcome of the criminal case.
That point was brought up previously.
genuineoriginal
New member
If you ever consummated your marriage with sex, especially on your wedding night after you took your vows, then you are officially married, and the marriage is based on that sexual act.
Without the entire "became one flesh" thing, there is no marriage.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
right - your decision to troll
while whining about others
as i've said, my point is made
genuineoriginal
New member
What is now classified as rape has absolutely no resemblance to what was classified as rape only 55 years ago.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
That's nice. You made your point in your quote above that you weren't interested in my answer. You didn't know what else to do when faced with that but whine about me trolling my own thread. I mean, really... you're not interested in my answer and then you follow me around nagging me for an answer. :chuckle:
Thanks for dropping by. Do stop by and check your post count on the way out.
ClimateSanity
New member
Yep. And the point is clear as can be for all to see.
genuineoriginal
New member
You have just declared that feminists (who changed the definition of rape from the very clear definition held in 1960 to the modern definition) are losers for redefining rape so they can push their own agenda.
I agree 100 %.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
which was the whole point behind my comments last month that ignited anna's fury and started this whole multiple-thread discussion
it's worth learning what the new definition includes: http://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
regardless of whether anna thinks they come from losers
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
:chuckle: Oh, it sure is, Darryl.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Rape has always been about lack of consent. I agree 100%.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
not according to the US Department of Justice
acccording to the USDoJ, it used to be about "forcibly and against her will"
not "lack of consent"
educate yourself and stop looking like such a moron: http://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
A real man doesn't have to rape to have sex.
Only vulgar, brutish louts have to do that.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
if it's the same thing, why did they change it?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Why are you asking me questions when you don't care about the answers?
- Status