Answering old threads thread
- Thread starter Idolater
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
You work too hard to prove what you have in your own imagination.
You can't compare any of that to raping one's own wife or forcing her to do anything against her own free will. God does not do that to us, and you are nowhere close to God. Try harder. You won't get there with any amount of distraction. Off topic and down right childish.
A wife is a member of Christ's body, and even HE would not force a wife to have sex with her husband.
Keep trying. You'll never get there.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Seriously, comparing AB to a nazi. You lose credibility by resorting to such a lazy generalization. AB is a decent, honorable man. Which is why he (a real man) doesn’t support spousal rape.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Not just Nazis
... have rights equal to men, and men and women both have rights independent of their social status
You believe that this is the "right" answer because it is the American answer and the Catholic answer.
But it is an answer rejected by many, perhaps most societies today. And rejected by all historically. We live in a tiny bubble of historical time in which your evaluation of right exists.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Now apply that to sex. It's permissible when both parties agree to it, pretty straightforward yeah? Otherwise, what does it say about you or anyone else who would entertain forcing an unwilling spouse into intercourse? How is that even remotely appealing if you love and cherish her? Cos it shouldn't be.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
To be fair, I think he was referring to Skeeter although I don't get the utilitarian stuff anyway...
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
It's beyond pathetic really and again reason to hope that those who advocate it remain terminally single. It would repel any reasonable man to even entertain forcing sex on his wife,Yep, and yet there is all this silly squabbling about a "godly" man forcing his wife to have sex.
Was our Lord able to abstain from sex when He walked among us?
Can a man locked up in a Japanese prison camp live without having sex?
Is that junk that important that one's cherished wife must be forced?
And this stuff we're hearing from professing Christians?????????
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
The expectation in a Christian marriage is that the couple will engage in carnal knowledge.
I like the language in the KJV better:
5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
Refusing sex to your spouse is a form of fraud. If continued, the marriage is fraudulent.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
It would never be an issue with a Godly wife.Yep, and yet there is all this silly squabbling about a "godly" man forcing his wife to have sex.
He was able to abstain from marriage when He walked among us.
You're comparing living with a frigid wife to being imprisoned by one of the most brutal military regimes known.
You sure you want to do that?
Absolutely
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
It doesn't matter how long it takes someone to get something right. It doesn't make it not right just because it takes a long time.
Last edited:
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
I didn't do that. AB passed that test with flying colors, just took a while for him to come clean. Skeeter can't pass that test, not if he's honest.
It's because he believes in absolute rights. Skeeter doesn't.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Yeah.
What benefits the most people the most is what's approved as moral in utilitarianism. What benefits the most people the most, when there's only one fertile woman alive but she's a lesbian and refuses to marry a man? Is it to honor her absolute right, and thus the species ends, or is it to rape her so that billions more people get the chance to live, who otherwise wouldn't have? For Skeeter this is easy; you definitely rape her because this is the greatest good for the greatest number of people, it's a 'slam dunk', and a 'no brainer'. Rape isn't just permitted by his utilitarianism in my contrived trolley problem, it's obligated. It would be immoral to not rape the lesbian under Skeeter's utilitarian moral philosophy.
(This is why I don't like utilitarian legal positivism among our judges, which is why I'm a Republican and supported President Trump and will continue to be a Republican just so long as the Democrats----like Skeeter----refuse to acknowledge their wicked theory on rights and laws and morality. It is unabashed wickedness. My trolley problem shows it.)
But what about if she doesn't want to get the vaccine? Does her right against being raped, apply to also a right against getting jabbed in another way? Because getting a shot in the arm isn't the same as rape, for our talk about women's bodily autonomy we really only apply it to rape and abortion, the absolute right against being raped and the absolute right to procure a legal abortion. But it's not the absolute right against getting a tiny needle put in your shoulder. That's curious.
Well said.
Mankind was created as an image of God.
I believe the image is not based on what one looks like in outward appearance, but is based on what one looks like in deed.
Deeds that exhibit justness, longsuffering, compassion, forgiveness, etc. towards others.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
My favorite topic which often got me banned from the hardcore feminist group on Facebook. The argument I would build would be that if you believed in a woman's bodily autonomy, her ABSOLUTE bodily autonomy, you would support her right to kill her post-birth child through neglect and abandonment.
What a delusional, insane argument.
Derf
Well-known member
First let's apply it as written, to abstaining from sex. If there's no agreement to abstain, then there should be no abstaining. As long as that's followed, there is no occasion for forcing.
Now I'll let you find the Bible verse for your position--that both partners have to agree before sex can commence.
Skeeter is as far from a nazi as one can be. FTR, I am not attributing those characteristics to Idolater either.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
That is anathema to the modern fourth wave feminist who insists on the woman's right to FULL autonomy (even though they don't understand the implications of that)
This is why you will never find a feminist in a Christian marriage.
This is why you will never get a feminist to understand what a Christian marriage is really about.
And this is why I don't get involved in these discussions usually. You end up arguing Christian concepts with people who not only don't understand them but CAN'T understand them.
Got it, though Skeeter seems to be fairly decent, IMO, and I don’t concern myself with the utilitarian stuff.