Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

[Town Heretic]

The fundamental meaning of 'rape' means 'to seize'.

Rape is sex without consent.

Now, let's say a wife comes home, and she does not want to have sex but the husband forcibly insists. Would that be rape by the technical sense?

No, it would be rape in every sense.

Yes. But is it rape in the sense of her being assaulted?

You still don't understand the definition of assault either. You mean battery, which would also not be a necessary part of what constitutes a rape, though many rapes do involve both assault and battery.

No- it is an inconvenience wrought on by her husband.

lain: That statement alone, the sheer magnitude of its ignorance should qualify you for Congress.

This is something that has always been considered the case through history. It was not until about forty years ago that there was even a notion of 'marital rape'.

Guess how long it took the human race to figure out that slavery was a bad idea.

Many women embrace an appearance of victimization, because it has gotten to a point where it is a prospect for them. So long as you refuse to acknowledge it, and consistently warp everything to make it about men and not them, that insanity will continue to evolve.

Yeah, here's the thing...you can't call rape an inconvenience and then expect to be treated much differently from, say, Trad discussing race.

And for exactly the same reason.

 

[intojoy]

When man talks woman shuts up


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Town Heretic]

When man talks woman shuts up

Pretend you're a woman and men are talking.

It was either that or, "Yeah, that'll show'em...that'll show everyone really." lain:

 

[Eagles Wings]

Putting all doctrine and theology aside, I would seriously doubt the true conversion of a man who believes he can justify raping his wife.

As one who is in a covenant marriage, the sacrificial promise to love and cherish must be at the forefront on a daily basis, and oftentimes from hour to hour. The physical union is important and yet is just one part of the total mutual self-giving one realizes in marriage.

 

[ok doser]

Putting all doctrine and theology aside, I would seriously doubt the true conversion of a man who believes he can justify raping his wife.

As one who is in a covenant marriage, the sacrificial promise to love and cherish must be at the forefront on a daily basis, and oftentimes from hour to hour. The physical union is important and yet is just one part of the total mutual self-giving one realizes in marriage.

:thumb:


there is no marital rape in a Christian marriage

 

[Nameless.In.Grace]

Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

Rape is sex without consent.


No, it would be rape in every sense.


You still don't understand the definition of assault either. You mean battery, which would also not be a necessary part of what constitutes a rape, though many rapes do involve both assault and battery.


lain: That statement alone, the sheer magnitude of its ignorance should qualify you for Congress.


Guess how long it took the human race to figure out that slavery was a bad idea.



Yeah, here's the thing...you can't call rape an inconvenience and then expect to be treated much differently from, say, Trad discussing race.

And for exactly the same reason.

Town Heretic,

I think Crucible is delicately arguing that it's not rape if you yell "surprise"!

 

[ok doser]

...you can't call rape an inconvenience ...

i can


rape is an inconvenience


quit whining about it, get over it and get on with your life

 

[Town Heretic]

So, among other things, I wrote: you can't call rape an inconvenience...

i can

Boy, you really showed me with that one...really showed everyone, I'd think.

rape is an inconvenience

Like death, taxes or the lion's share of your posts then.

Well there's something to be said for grotesque understatement. And that certainly said it. lain:

quit whining about it, get over it and get on with your life

Were you still talking to me or did you pass a mirror and have an epiphany? :think:

 

[ok doser]

Like death...

not like death - death is permanent

rape, on the other hand, is a momentary instance of trauma that the victim can choose to internalize, dwell on and make a permanent scar on their psyche, and continually pick at

or, the victim can choose to quit whining about it, get over it and get on with their life

 

[Town Heretic]

not like death - death is permanent

Not really getting it then, are you.

rape, on the other hand, is a momentary instance of trauma that the victim can choose to internalize, dwell on and make a permanent scar on their psyche, and continually pick at

Rather, rape is usually a deeply scaring event, a trauma that may take years to recover from. Many never fully do.

Your description of rape as an inconvenience was trivializing something that shouldn't be..a common enough staple with you.

or, the victim can choose to quit whining about it, get over it and get on with their life

And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes another episode of "Ask a Sociopath". Keep those cards and letters coming and Sod will respond as quickly as is inhumanly possible. :thumb:

 

[Crucible]

You still don't understand the definition of assault either. You mean battery, which would also not be a necessary part of what constitutes a rape, though many rapes do involve both assault and battery.

Well, I got this here assault rifle, which only shoots loud noises

Your legalistic nonsense has been noted from the first time you ever spoke them.

If I throw a paper ball at you, that is technically against the law. I get it- the law is a big giant joke, you don't have to keep repeating it.

lain: That statement alone, the sheer magnitude of its ignorance should qualify you for Congress.

The only reason you get away with calling it 'ignorance' is not because it is ignorance, but because I'm one person in a mass of ignorant people on your side.

Prove that it's ignorance- you all's bald consensus does not suffice lain:

Guess how long it took the human race to figure out that slavery was a bad idea.

As soon as we figured industrialization was neater.

Yeah, here's the thing...you can't call rape an inconvenience and then expect to be treated much differently from, say, Trad discussing race.

Cool story.

That's the case in a room full of liberal women, which those like yourself betray yourself in :wave2:

 

[patrick jane]

Most rapes are harmless enough

 

[Rusha]

Most rapes are harmless enough

There is no harm in one person FORCING sex on another person? Seriously. :nono:

 

[patrick jane]

There is no harm in one person FORCING sex on another person? Seriously. :nono:

I was being silly and foolish to show how wrong it is

 

[Rusha]

I was being silly and foolish to show how wrong it is

Oh, sarcasm. Alright ...

I am glad to know that you don't have the same sick, twisted mindset of a few ... well, they know who they are.

 

[Crucible]

Oh, sarcasm. Alright ...

I am glad to know that you don't have the same sick, twisted mindset of a few ... well, they know who they are.

You all are desperate, is all. That's why you few can't really make a coherent, rational argument- instead it's semantics, legality, repetitive insults and back patting.

And trying to get under my skin, as you deliberately have attempted numerous times, doesn't work so you either have to simply go away or go back to the same nonsense.

 

[Town Heretic]

Your legalistic nonsense has been noted from the first time you ever spoke them.

Like a kid telling his mathematics professor, "That numerical nonsense you're spouting won't change my opinion that 1+1= 15."

If I throw a paper ball at you, that is technically against the law.

See, even with your convoluted lack of understanding you realize there's a distinction made between the letter and spirit of the law. Doesn't impact any of the hypothetical situations taken under consideration so far, so it's a straw man approach, but better than most of what you've said relating to the point.

I get it- the law is a big giant joke

That's one way to respond to something you don't understand. A foolish way, but one of them.

The only reason you get away with calling it 'ignorance'

Is because every time you stray from bald declaration into an attempt to utilize fact you demonstrably miss the mark, as with assault and battery. By way of example:

As soon as we figured industrialization was neater.

Missing the point of my rebuttal while mistaking the end of slavery came because the industrial revolution had rendered it obsolete. Rather, the South was striving to expand the practice into new territories. That's the principle reason for the Civil War.

So you don't understand history either. Why isn't that surprising? I mean given how eager you are to repeat some of it.

Prove that it's ignorance- you all's bald consensus does not suffice

I've repeatedly demonstrated your ignorance of the law. As for your larger attitude relating to women, here's another legal term that you won't likely understand: prima facie. When someone says that rape is inconvenient, the case for the ignorance of the person uttering it is established within the utterance itself, the failure of the one stating to understand the proper usage.

That's the case in a room full of liberal women, which those like yourself betray yourself in

I'm trying to decide if that's worse as a grammatical statement or an argument. :think: But why choose?

 

[intojoy]

Pretend you're a woman and men are talking.

It was either that or, "Yeah, that'll show'em...that'll show everyone really." lain:

Man has a beard


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[intojoy]

I was being silly and foolish to show how wrong it is

No, he forces it all the time


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Rusha]

I was being silly and foolish to show how wrong it is

Oh, sarcasm. Alright ...

I am glad to know that you don't have the same sick, twisted mindset of a few ... well, they know who they are.

Right. On. Cue.

You all are desperate, is all.

:kookoo: