Is marital rape scripturally defensible?
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
- Status
And so the pot declares ......................
And so the pot declares ......................
And so the pot declares ......................
Or, because it's wrong, a violation of the dignity of another and only an evil or amoral troll would take exception to taking exception to it.
But really, how many of you can there be? :think: I mean outside of your noggin.
^ This ...
I didn't know your skin was so thin, I'm glad that Rusha gets under your thin skin !!
'Marital rape' is an oxymoron- that is why for all of history, including almost entirely the common era, it was never seen as a crime. People actually held marriage to what it is, where the consent is made sealed at the time of the vow.
They probably never taught you that in law school, being that any integrity that was ever in law went away a long time ago
We ask ourselves those questions every time you sign in .....
It seems you only halfway read as well :chuckle:
Arsenios
Well-known member
The fundamental meaning of 'rape' means 'to seize'. A wife seizes the marriage when she withholds sex as a device of control. 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? Yes. But is it rape in the sense of her being assaulted? No- it is an inconvenience wrought on by her husband.
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'. No doubt, this had everything to do with feminism and the ridiculous platitudes that came out of it- an excessive demand for emancipation in everything, including marriage.
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.
That's the real shame- men in the 1st World being afraid of marriage because it's like making a deal with the Devil- the public and the courts automatically presume that he is in the wrong, or that she is in distress, and so men typically cannot afford any sort of problem with the wife- so you're right, a man puts his life at stake for her. The difference is that it isn't from an external source in which he's staking himself
You might be surprised at how many child rapists blame the child...
And at how many 'regular' rapists blame the woman...
Wife rapers blame the wife...
And call it marriage...
Even some so-called "Christian" wife rapers...
Lord have mercy!
Arsenios
Nah ... *men* don't commit rape ... nor do they promote it. MEN speak out against it. Thankfully there are quite a few *men* willing to speak out on this thread against evil predators who commit such vile acts.
Big thanks to ... Town Heretic, Arthur Brain, Patrick Jane, Feral Phoenician and Arsenios. You could learn a lot from them if you would close your mouth and actually read.
Last edited:
Indeed ... it's never *their* fault.
Yeah, give your props and thank their posts- reveal your inner victimhood.
Women do not decide who 'real men' are- that's one illusion among many.
Yeah, its never the women's fault- that's what you all perpetuate and simultaneously deny, just as the mental illness of feminism dictates
Otherwise, these godforsaken conversations wouldn't go the route they always go- not one single concern for the man, just persistent scrutiny on the man.
Only an actual moron would believe it.
You realize that appealing to history is a logical fallacy, unless the argument is over history.
lain: Of course you don't. Well, add that to the list of things you need to study if you get into college.No, it really isn't. You also don't have the right to pierce your wife's navel or tattoo her backside because you find it interesting and, hey, she's yours. :nono:
The study of law is the actual study of the law and not the peculiar series of disjointed and mistaken ideas that appear to comprise your own slapdash notion regarding it. Also, the study of law is seated in critical analysis and logic, skills completely superfluous in your approach.
That you can at least spell the word integrity might give me some measure of hope, but I've read too much of you to let it.
Last edited:
Eagles Wings
New member
I pulled my thanks on all previous posts as I had not read the whole thread.
My post regarding the sanctity of marriage stands. A married, Christian man must never be demanding or aggressive, nor seek to sexually exploit his wife whatsoever.
A married, Christian woman must never freeze up or withdraw from marital relations as this is detrimental to the wellbeing of her husband, and can lead to dire consequences. (Sin always does, right?)
Any woman who cries rape when it is not a fact will have the wrath of God to face, if she does not repent.
There is no punishment equal to God's punishment for a man who rapes a woman, if he does not repent.
Only in Christ is there forgiveness for sin.
Last edited:
- Status