Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

[elohiym]

It is not possible for a husband to rape his spouse...

It is not logical to call an act rape if a stranger does it but not if the husband does it. Forced sex violates the golden rule; it's not loving your wife as Christ loved the church; it's hatred, thus murder. I've provided you ample scripture to prove that.

... and your response shows that you are more interested in "putting scumbags in prison" than in preserving society.

Your response shows you are wiling to let women get raped in marriage rather than put scumbag rapists in jail because you think a husband can't rape his wife no matter what he does.

If you look at the history of the debate over whether there could be rape in a marriage, you will see that it has been debated for hundreds of years.

Yes, there have always been people like you willing to defend the rape of women in marriage. It's as if you are defending something you've already done, but I hope that's not the case.

The conclusion of the debates prior to the feminists getting involved was that...

I'm more concerned about what you masculinists are going to do to the male rights movement, how you are going to screw it up by arguing dumb crap like you have been on this thread.

... the preservation of the institution of marriage was a more compelling interest for the government than prosecuting a husband for having sex with his wife.

It's rape, and they are rightfully prosecuting him for that.

 

[elohiym]

The Bible teaches on how to be a good wife or husband, but there is nothing stated in that secures penalty for being abusive outside the obvious fact that one's sins are dealt with by God. The Bible is otherwise very much like the Quran in this regard- very patriarchal. Women apart from the teachings are in a state of rebellion.

Even with adultery and divorce, it's only the men who can actually enact divorce....

You are wrong.

Exodus 21:11 And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.

 

[elohiym]

Bible text against spousal abuse. :thumb:

Where?

See above for another example, but the golden rule should have been sufficient.

 

[elohiym]

Yeah, and no one catches fish the size of those you catch, either, do they?

I wasn't addressing you, and wasn't discussing fish. The person I was addressing, last I knew, was still a virgin and unmarried, whereas I am married and have eight children. It's a certainty that I know considerably more about marriage and sex than he does, which is why he said, "fair enough." His comment reflected his lack of experience.

 

[elohiym]

Do not read my posts as saying: "Women, you OWE it to your husbands. If they rape you, it's your fault!"

That's not what I'm saying.

I know, Trad.

What I'm saying is that husbands and wives should relate to each other with a spirit of love, self-sacrifice and self-giving. They should be attentive to the needs and well being of the other and should be eager to do good for the other.

That's all. :idunno:

I can agree with that provided any sense of obligation comes from within and not expected or demanded from the other.

 

[Crucible]

You are wrong.

Exodus 21:11 And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.

That's only under the condition of polygamy in which the husband denies her over a newer wife. It was a matter of base survival.

So, I'm basically still right. You trying to shoehorn your whole argument on that is telling.

Why don't you just accept that women have overstepped their boundaries.

 

[genuineoriginal]

It is not logical to call an act rape if a stranger does it but not if the husband does it.

No, a person that is not a stranger but is also not the husband can also commit rape.

IForced sex violates the golden rule; it's not loving your wife as Christ loved the church; it's hatred, thus murder. I've provided you ample scripture to prove that.

You have strayed off the topic.

The topic is whether there is justification in scripture for calling it rape when it is sex between a husband and a wife.

Your response shows you are wiling to let women get raped in marriage rather than put scumbag rapists in jail because you think a husband can't rape his wife no matter what he does.

You should have told God about this before He had the Bible written, so He could have written it according to your sensibilities instead of His own.

 

[genuineoriginal]

See above for another example, but the golden rule should have been sufficient.

Sufficient for what?
The golden rule says nothing about sex inside of a marriage.

As far as your example goes, you missed the preceding verse.

Exodus 21:10 10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.​

The wife's duty of marriage is that the husband is to lie with her.
The husband is not allowed to have less sex with his first wife after taking a second wife.

 

[elohiym]

It is an obligation. It is assumed in the biblical teachings.

It's assumed by some based on certain scriptures. I don't agree with the assumption since it violates the golden rule. How the government of Israel interpreted it as an obligation may interest you because they stipulated how many times a man had to perform sexually with his wife; for example, a sailor had to perform at least once every six months due to long periods of absence but an unemployed man had to perform sexually every day because he was home all day. I don't believe they required a wife to provide sex on demand as you'd like but you can check and get back to us.

What I see, is you cherry picking what fits in with the interests of women and watering down or completely ignoring the rights and defenses of men.

Men have no right to force sex on their wives and should have no defense if they do. As for male rights, when you actually have a discussion about them, you will see that I am an advocate for legitimate male rights.

All of your posts are saturated with men being subservient to women based on their preferences and will, and not the obligation of women to do the same.

No, that's not accurate. You need to read my posts more carefully. I don't believe either gender is subservient to the other.

How is a woman 'raped' by their husband in any sense of a stranger seizing and raping somebody?

That is what is known as a stupid question.

It's stupid.

Yes, a stupid question you asked.

Women play the victim card all the way to their own nullification of a marriage contract- using sex as a way of control over the husband.

Woman who are forced to have sex with men they don't want to have sex with are victims. It's wrong for either spouse to use sex as a way of controlling the other.

That's what it's really about. God forbid man takes control of something.

God forbid he takes control of his wife's body against her will.

I think the only 'scumbag' is the person who teaches that men should be apologetic for being men, and calling it misogyny to expect that wives do as God made and instructs them to do.

Too bad you don't think a rapist is scumbag, too. If you don't want to be viewed as misogynistic then don't act misogynistic. I'm not telling anyone to apologize for being a man; but I would suggest a few here apologize for being monumental morons in this conversation.

 

[elohiym]

Sufficient for what?
The golden rule says nothing about sex inside of a marriage.

Sure it does. You don't force sex on your wife because you wouldn't want sex forced on you.

The wife's duty of marriage is that the husband is to lie with her.
The husband is not allowed to have less sex with his first wife after taking a second wife.

The point is that according to God's law the wife was allowed to initiate the divorce.

 

[Crucible]

That is what is known as a stupid question.

No it isn't. A stranger is a transgressor, a husband is someone who a woman is obligated to give their conjugal rights.

Woman who are forced to have sex with men they don't want to have sex with are victims.

Everything makes women a victim. A fart in the wind makes a woman a victim. Men are tired of hearing it.

It's wrong for either spouse to use sex as a way of controlling the other.

Unless it's the woman, because it is something you will never make an actual issue of. It will always be this abused subject :doh:

An here we are, right back at the beginning where the actual, primary issue that cripples most marriages is being replaced by the usual inability for women to take accountability for anything.

God forbid he takes control of his wife's body against her will.

The Bible says that she has no authority over her own body.

If you don't want to be viewed as misogynistic then don't act misogynistic.

I'm viewed as misogynistic because I don't embrace Stockholm's syndrome, pleading for my captors.
The Bible teaches a very different paradigm then what exists today, and all you gave to offer is passivity with a lean toward female bias. Every time a man gets screwed over in marriage, men get more and more tired of that as well.

 

[elohiym]

That's only under the condition of polygamy in which the husband denies her over a newer wife. It was a matter of base survival...

You are equivocating now. I already defeated the specific point. A woman could initiate a divorce. The Jews allowed women to initiate divorce. Get it?

So, I'm basically still right.

No, you are still wrong.

Why don't you just accept that women have overstepped their boundaries.

Why don't you tell me what you think women's boundaries are exactly? You were wrong about them not being able to initiate divorce. Next.

 

[Crucible]

You are equivocating now. I already defeated the specific point. A woman could initiate a divorce. The Jews allowed women to initiate divorce. Get it?

They could only leave the husband if she were reduced to not having proper food and clothing. It was a matter of survival when the man chose another spouse to a point where he left her in the dark completely.

Do you get it?
You do, but you won't admit it.

Why don't you tell me what you think women's boundaries are exactly?

Well you believe they have none, so at this point I would simply say to flip to any freaking page in the Bible!

You were wrong about initiating divorce. Next.

No I wasn't. You're just trying to shoehorn an ideology through a vestige of a giant that otherwise shows you to be wrong.

NEXT

 

[exminister]

Where?

You clipping my post and the original is comical and telling.

You only see what you want to see in the bible.

:beanboy:

 

[ok doser]

I am an ethnic Jew. Many of my relatives were exterminated in the holocaust.

congratulations

An intelligent and compassionate person would realize the difference between supporting laws against forced sex and supporting the extermination of an ethnic group.

and someone who isn't a total tard would understand that the insertion of the state between that which God has joined together into ONE is as evil as the killing of innocents

Forced sex ...

how can you force sex on yourself?

 

[TulipBee]

How homosexuals answer this topic will be creepy. Imagine married same sex having authority to rape thier partner without being arrested. What is the difference between rape and domestic violence?

 

[ok doser]

homos aren't married, regardless of what the state tells them - they're not one flesh, joined by God

they're perverts who disgust God and should be executed


i don't care what happens to them

 

[chrysostom]

they're perverts who disgust God and should be executed

that makes you a wacko
and
it makes us wonder about anything that you say

 

[exminister]

they're perverts who disgust God and should be executed

i don't care what happens to them

quoting Mohammed

 

[ClimateSanity]

congratulations



and someone who isn't a total tard would understand that the insertion of the state between that which God has joined together into ONE is as evil as the killing of innocents



how can you force sex on yourself?

Hey! Lighten up. You can disagree without denigrating the guy.