Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

[Crucible]

Read it to start with dingbat and it would appear that most Christians agree that there's no scriptural defence for forcing sex on another against their will, as just happens to be rightfully recognized under law as well. So suck it up.

With a spouse, that will is not theirs. It's something that I've brought up twice, and nobody responded because those 'most Christians' you are referring to are simply agreeing with the idea that it is rape and masquerading it as being against scripture when it, in fact, is not.

So, yeah.. if anyone wants to have an actual discussion on the Bible instead of pretending the feminist bias is somehow in it then let me know.
Otherwise, I'm not going to waste away on a subject intended to throw one's self righteous antics unto men the same as every other God forsaken thing there is between the sexes.

 

[Delmar]

So, genuineoriginal, if you held your wife down and forced yourself on her, you believe you would not be raping her.

YES or NO?

Any other 'Christian' men agree with genuineoriginal and Crucible?

I can't imagine why a God fearing man would want to do such a thing.

 

[badp]

For some of them, rape is just a little word made up by feminists.

Actually, one reason we know rape is wrong is because the Bible says so. Feminists don't give a rat's rear if a woman is raped. That's why they're all good with pornography, abortion, and birth control. Those are great enablers of rapists.

 

[ok doser]

I can't imagine why a God fearing man would want to do such a thing.

anna no longer recognizes God, del

 

[genuineoriginal]

Rape is rape

Unfortunately for that argument, the changing definitions of rape since the 1970s shows that not everything that is currently called rape is actually rape.

_____
FBI advisory board approves new definition of rape

On Tuesday, November 6th the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Advisory Board unanimously voted to submit an updated definition of Rape for final approval to FBI director Robert Muller. It is expected that he will approve the new definition.

This comes after over a year of activism by feminist groups who stand to benefit financial by the the broadened definition of rape which is now to include the “inability to give consent.”
_____​

 

[Arthur Brain]

what is it you think i'm objecting to?

Well, if a husband forces himself on his wife is that rape, yes or no?

 

[annabenedetti]

Now do I agree that a husband forcing himself on the wife is being a a jerk, and in some form of sin doing so? Yes. But do I think it is rape on the same level as how rape usually goes? No

Exactly.

And that's why you're in the 'Yes' column.

 

[ok doser]

Well, if a husband forces himself on his wife is that rape, yes or no?

why would a husband have to force himself on his wife?

 

[Delmar]

anna no longer recognizes God, del

As far as I can tell she is not the one who thinks it's OK to force people.

 

[annabenedetti]

Well, if a husband forces himself on his wife is that rape, yes or no?

Don't expect a yes or no answer to that question. He can't do it.

 

[ok doser]

Unfortunately for that argument, the changing definitions of rape since the 1970s shows that not everything that is currently called rape is actually rape.

_____
FBI advisory board approves new definition of rape

On Tuesday, November 6th the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Advisory Board unanimously voted to submit an updated definition of Rape for final approval to FBI director Robert Muller. It is expected that he will approve the new definition.

This comes after over a year of activism by feminist groups who stand to benefit financial by the the broadened definition of rape which is now to include the “inability to give consent.”
_____​

rusha posted this a few days ago::

The actual definition of rape is here: http://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape So yes, someone who forces sex on another person is an evil, vicious monster.

From Rusha's link:

... the new definition recognizes that a victim can be incapacitated and thus unable to consent because of ingestion of drugs or alcohol.

but nobody is sensitive to the fact that my evil, vicious monster of a wife often raped me when i was incapacitated because of my ingestion of alcohol and my inability to consent!



yes, that's right

i was raped

by my wife

often

it was traumatic

 

[ok doser]

how about it artie?

are you willing to recognize my traumatic experiences?

 

[ok doser]

As far as I can tell she is not the one who thinks it's OK to force people.

as far as i can tell, nobody thinks it's ok to force people :idunno:



once again, this is just anna playing her silly games

 

[bybee]

rusha posted this a few days ago::





From Rusha's link:

... the new definition recognizes that a victim can be incapacitated and thus unable to consent because of ingestion of drugs or alcohol.

but nobody is sensitive to the fact that my evil, vicious monster of a wife often raped me when i was incapacitated because of my ingestion of alcohol and my inability to consent!



yes, that's right

i was raped

by my wife

often

it was traumatic

A gentleman would not expose his wife with such sordid expressions. It is not our business.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Unfortunately for that argument, the changing definitions of rape since the 1970s shows that not everything that is currently called rape is actually rape.

_____
FBI advisory board approves new definition of rape

On Tuesday, November 6th the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Advisory Board unanimously voted to submit an updated definition of Rape for final approval to FBI director Robert Muller. It is expected that he will approve the new definition.

This comes after over a year of activism by feminist groups who stand to benefit financial by the the broadened definition of rape which is now to include the “inability to give consent.”
_____​

Well, anyone forcing themselves on another is rape and if someone does so when the other party is incapable of giving consent/unconscious etc then that's rape too and rightfully so. Any problem with that?

 

[ok doser]

A gentleman would not expose his wife with such sordid expressions. It is not our business.

go away bybee

The only ones who are objecting are you -

what is it you think i'm objecting to?

 

[Arthur Brain]

With a spouse, that will is not theirs. It's something that I've brought up twice, and nobody responded because those 'most Christians' you are referring to are simply agreeing with the idea that it is rape and masquerading it as being against scripture when it, in fact, is not.

So, yeah.. if anyone wants to have an actual discussion on the Bible instead of pretending the feminist bias is somehow in it then let me know.
Otherwise, I'm not going to waste away on a subject intended to throw one's self righteous antics unto men the same as every other God forsaken thing there is between the sexes.

So, you start initiating sex with your wife, she says "no" and you can go ahead carte blanche anyway and it's not rape because she effectively doesn't have the right to refuse?

:freak:

 

[Traditio]

Anna:

1. It is a duty of both husband and wife to concede sexual relations to his or her spouse when reasonable request is made. The refusal to do so could be mortally sinful.

2. Each spouse has an obligation of justice and charity to respect the other. The admonition of St. Paul: "Husbands, love your wives as Christ has loved the Church" comes to mind. Spousal rape, i.e., using force or coersion to engage in sexual relations with one's spouse against his or her will could very well be mortally sinful.

There could be good reasons for a husband or wife not to request sexual relations, and, in turn, for the husband or wife to refuse. This should be respected. [Though, again, I insist: if there otherwise are not compelling reasons, the answer to such a request, POSSIBLY AT PAIN OF MORTAL SIN, should be "Yes!"]

 

[Crucible]

And that's why you're in the 'Yes' column.

Cool. I'm not concerned with a woman who can't defend her own position and so goes and makes a thread trying to get others to do it for them.

Rape is 'to seize', so if you want to 'black and white' the matter, women rape all the time. Am I going to cry a river of a woman's husband forcing sex because she's utilizing sex to SEIZE the marriage? Of course not. Especially when, if a divorce happens, she's going to SEIZE the bank account and household, and probably put another man inside of it.

All I see with this entire subject is just another way to scrutinize and attack men- and treating women's bodies like they are holy vessels above all other things.
And I really just don't go in for that mainstream, white knight nonsense. Your husband inconveniences you with sex, deal with it. It's not rape. You just aren't getting that sexual control women like to aim for to get what they want, which is WHY THE BIBLE DOESN'T CONSIDER IT RAPE.

Go start a bunch of drama with someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

 

[Arthur Brain]

why would a husband have to force himself on his wife?

There's no justifiable reason for a husband to even attempt that. If his wife doesn't want sex then he should back off and respect that. If he doesn't then he's raping her, end of story. Any objections?