Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

[ClimateSanity]

So this thread wasn't already creepy enough for you?

Being turned on by your wife is creepy? You might want to reconsider.

 

[Arthur Brain]

the question was: should he go to prison?

If he carries on after she's told him to stop and forces himself on her against her will then he's raping her. What do you think he deserves?

 

[Arthur Brain]

and now you're just making jokes about rape :nono:

Nooooo, I was making a joke (or an observation) about you...

 

[annabenedetti]

This thread is an ad hominem attack. Care to read the OP, which has my name in it?

Uh, the OP has a quote of yours in it, and a question to other Christian men asking them if they agree. Nothing more. I hope you'll be able to survive that horrific onslaught.

The only reason this thread exists is because some poster didn't have it in her to address anything that was stated to her in other threads so she went and made this one so that her small cavalry can arrive and talk a bunch of nonsense about me (and a couple others).

I would ask where the forum rules are on this, but apparently there may as well be none.

This thread exists because your and GO's quotes would have been lost in that huge thread and I wanted to continue that line of discussion. There are no forum rules preventing that. :chuckle: If you don't like it, don't post in it. And if you're serious about trying to "avoid" having to make "statements" about the subject, by all means follow through. I won't mind.

 

[Rusha]

Right off hand? I don't know. Ultimately, this requires a determination of prudence on the part of the spouse. "If I get pregnant, I could die" strikes me as a pretty good reason to say "no" if the woman is in the fertile period of her cycle.

That seems reasonable, though I would add that in a loving relationship, a couple could decide to take permanent steps to make sure no pregnancy occurs and if children were an issue, adopt.

Otherwise? I really don't know. "I don't feel like it" or "I'm tired" or "I have a headache" certainly isn't enough, though. We are talking about an obligation of justice. We are literally talking about a debt that has to be paid. For the woman to say "no," there has to be a very good reason for it.

I wasn't really thinking of the old "I just washed my hair" type of reasons". Certain illnesses or injuries should be a concern for a loving spouse. Healing takes time, but is a minor, temporary inconvenience.

I am, however, stating that those medical reasons I listed DO happen. I went through them towards the later months of my pregnancies and after giving birth. A wife or husband's health and welfare should trump the urge to have sex. It's temporary. In a case that it isn't ... "in sickness and in health".

Anyways, thank you for your well thought out answers.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

It's detestable to think that submission out of love could ever be forced, in a moral sense, biblical, legal or any other way.

Rape is forced by definition and is immoral in every way.

 

[annabenedetti]

... i was just turning back on her what she had been doing to genuineoriginal last night here and here

I wonder if GO thanked you for protecting him from me. :chuckle:

 

[annabenedetti]

It's detestable to think that submission out of love could ever be forced, in a moral sense, biblical, legal or any other way.

Rape is forced by definition and is immoral in every way.

:up:

 

[Arthur Brain]

I wonder if GO thanked you for protecting him from me. :chuckle:

Telling that neither can just answer that question either...

 

[Rusha]

No, they don't. Sterilization and contraception are contrary to the natural law. The only legitimate option that they have is to "wait it out" until the woman is no longer in the fertile period of her cycle. .

Of course they do. It would be your choice to forgo sterilization or contraception and wait it out.

.

So long as the marriage "contract" is in effect, they are in a state of obligation with respect to each other. If the Christian faith speaks truly, the marriage "contract," if contracted by baptised Christians, only can be dissolved at death. .

Eh, adultery or abuse is ample reason to end a marriage. You don't have to agree ... just as it isn't your decision to make.

.

I'm strongly inclined to think that "any" kind of adultery is not a valid reason to refuse. In support of this, I'll appeal to the example of the saints, and in particular, St. Monica, who did not refuse her husband even though he was not faithful. .

Well ... that's very special and all. Now I am obliged to tell you that many women refuse to be doormats.

.

If the spouse commits adultery with a close relative of his spouse, then he becomes "familiarized," so to speak, to his spouse, as St. Thomas tells us, and this forbids him from asking further, though his spouse, of course, is not to be punished, and may ask freely..

This is just odd ... that you would separate adultery in general as compared to adultery with close relatives. Adultery is adultery ... and i't always wrong and always the fault of the adulterer.

.

In the case of "regular" adultery, however, (and here, I do not speak from a position of firm knowledge, but am only voicing a tentative opinion) the offended spouse's refusal only further harms their marriage and exposes her husband to further temptation and danger. Though her husband should be sensitive to the fact that his wife is angry, hurt, etc., nonetheless, if asked, the wife should still probably say "yes" (all other things being equal, of course). .

Ummm ... no. Adulterers make a choice to put their spouses health at risk along with their marriage. Seriously, I don't believe the same men who state "the adulterous husband should be forgiven" would be so eager to forgive an adulterous wife.

The love of charity isn't easy. It isn't convenient. The love of charity demands sacrifice.

Sacrifice means a willingness to meet one's spouse half way. Adultery does not fit into that criteria.

 

[annabenedetti]

Telling that neither can just answer that question either...

Yep. It was a simple yes or no. Bright Raven answered the question at the very beginning.

 

[Crucible]

Uh, the OP has a quote of yours in it, and a question to other Christian men asking them if they agree. Nothing more. I hope you'll be able to survive that horrific onslaught.

You've made lists of people who disagree with us, and have contributed nothing to this thread other than goading.

All you are doing is trying to mar mine and others standing because you can't properly discuss anything- you made no real contribution to any other thread, either.

 

[genuineoriginal]

the posts I cited in the first place made it clear that the woman had to consent to sex with her husband or she was not a good Christian; in other words she was being sinful. This is what I objected to.

Fair enough.
My disagreement was your wording in this statement: "you [. . .] expect women to obey your every desire for no other reason than you are the man and she is the woman"

I may not have understood the posts the way you did, the posts I read had both the woman and the man having control of the other's body.
The other part, God is the head of Jesus, Jesus is the head of the man, the man is the head of the woman, are statements Paul made about responsibility, leadership, and who is to follow who, it is not about submission.

No allowance was made for her state of mind or body at the time; no consideration was given to the state of the marriage. It was just a blanket statement that the woman had to submit.

Your response was directed at ok doser.
I have read his posts, and never saw any hint that he believes that a woman must submit to him just because he is a man.

They made it clear that she was not allowed to refuse. I am sure I am not the only person here or indeed anywhere who thinks that this is wrong.

Could it be possible that you read the opposition's strawman arguments into what ok doser and Crucible were saying without checking to see if those strawman arguments were a valid representation of the beliefs?

 

[Arthur Brain]

You've made lists of people who disagree with us, and have contributed nothing to this thread other than goading.

So, a list of sane people then...

All you are doing is trying to mar mine and others standing because you can't properly discuss anything- you made no real contribution to any other thread, either.

Oh get your panties out of a bunch. There's no excuse for a married man to coerce sex with his wife against her will. None.

 

[Crucible]

...

 

[drbrumley]

is this thread for real? God says its ok to rape your wife? How absurd is that?

 

[CabinetMaker]

You seem to have a problem understanding the difference between a marriage and a non-sexual relationship.

The defining characteristics of a marriage start with a sexual relationship and offspring and include inlaws.

The spouses in a marriage also have a non-sexual relationship with each other, but that non-sexual relationship is not a defining characteristic of a marriage.

The defining characteristics of a non-sexual relationship are communication, shared values, and shared life experiences.

The non-sexual relationship in the marriage can fail, which almost always leads to the failure of the marriage.

Without the sexual relationship, there is no marriage.

Based on personal experience I can say with 100% certainty that you are wrong.

 

[CabinetMaker]

All of which are forbidden by the Natural Law and merit Hell.

Natural law is meaningless term. Catholic doctrine wrongly forbids certain things. Read the Song of Solomon sometime. Not the Catholic interpretation, read the actual book with the view point that it is most assuredly not a description of Christ's relationship to the church. In short, it's God's instructions to married couples to fully enjoy the physical aspects of their marriage.

 

[Crucible]

is this thread for real? God says its ok to rape your wife? How absurd is that?

This thread is about a five year old girl who is too much of a wimp to handle her own discussions, so she plays you all like a fiddle to come handle her child's play BS.

Good job. There sure as hell is absurdity, but not where you're trying to place it. I haven't seen this kind of backwards nonsense since that godforsaken 'CARM' website, whose founder's daughter left because of how obnoxiously retarded they are. Always trying to sink their rotten teeth into anyone they disagree with.

To hell with it. I'm done here.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Based on personal experience I can say with 100% certainty that you are wrong.

It is a shame that you lack any experience in identifying what a defining characteristic is.