Is marital rape scripturally defensible?

[Arthur Brain]

Typical liberal. :nono:

Typical copout...

Read his reply properly.

 

[Town Heretic]

...By the very nature of holy marriage, a husband forcing sex upon his wife cannot be seen as 'rape' in the fashion of two people not married-they are one in the flesh.

I don't see why not. Same mechanism in both.

A wife crying rape by her husband is something I just don't take so seriously.

Sorry to hear it. Well, God can literally work miracles, so I hope you're braced if the level of empathy to accomplish that ever arrives.

It's her husband.

And she's his wife, someone he is to treat with respect (I Peter 3:7) and someone he is to be gentle with (Colossians 3:19). Violent, non consensual sex, also known as rape, doesn't fit either bill.

It's a victim complex, it's not actually real but something imagined. That's the effect that feminism has done, you wouldn't catch women acting that way about it a century ago.

You wouldn't catch blacks voting a century ago, but it doesn't mean they didn't want to.

 

[WizardofOz]

Typical liberal. :nono:

:rotfl: Typical nonsense...

 

[annabenedetti]

We're talking about a rather specific topic, why wonder off to discuss propositions in general?

An xual proposition, no less...

 

[Traditio]

Typical copout...

Read his reply properly.

He made the following claim:

Every woman thinks that it is rape if a husband forces himself on his wife.

I asked:

So what? Is the opinion of a woman a necessary precondition for the truth value of a given proposition?

He replies basically by begging the initial question.

At any rate, I'll answer for you and for WoO:

The opinion of any given person is irrelevant to the truth of that thing. It is logically possible for all woman surveyed to hold x, but for not x to be the case.

Simply asserting that all woman surveyed agree that it is rape if a husband forces himself upon his wife is not a proof that it is, in fact, rape.

If you reply in turn that women disagree and will insist that it is rape if their husbands force themselves on them, then you are simply begging the question.

Note, these comments are irrelevant to the question at hand (i.e., is such a thing rape). I am making a purely logical point.

 

[annabenedetti]

For any given proposition x, do you hold that x is true only if at least one woman asserts that x is true? Do you hold that the assent of a woman is a necessary condition for the truth of a given proposition?

How about we go with any given loser who thinks it's okay to force himself on his wife against her will and go from there?

 

[annabenedetti]

Note, these comments are irrelevant to the question at hand (i.e., is such a thing rape)

Duly noted.

 

[WizardofOz]

He made the following claim:

Every woman thinks that it is rape if a husband forces himself on his wife.[

:liberals:
Who made that claim?

I asked:

So what? Is the opinion of a woman a necessary precondition for the truth value of a given proposition?

He replies basically by begging the initial question.

At any rate, I'll answer for you and for WoO:

The opinion of any given person is irrelevant to the truth of that thing. It is logically possible for all woman surveyed to hold x, but for not x to be the case.

Simply asserting that all woman surveyed agree that it is rape if a husband forces himself upon his wife is not a proof that it is, in fact, rape.

If you reply in turn that women disagree and will insist that it is rape if their husbands force themselves on them, then you are simply begging the question.

Note, these comments are irrelevant to the question at hand (i.e., is such a thing rape). I am making a purely logical point.

If a wife does not agree that a husband can force himself on her against her will, then the husband and the marriage will have a big problem. :duh:

Hence my original question.

 

[Rusha]

How about we go with any given loser who thinks it's okay to force himself on his wife against her will and go from there?

Adding to that point ... what kind of pathetic loser would force himself on his wife? Refusal means "At this very moment, I don't want to".

 

[Traditio]

How about we go with any given loser who thinks it's okay to force himself on his wife against her will and go from there?

Or how about we ignore the question of who's making the argument or who believes the given proposition, and attend to the actual arguments either for or against the given proposition?

 

[Traditio]

:liberals:
Who made that claim?

You strongly implied it.

If a wife does not agree that a husband can force himself on her against her will, then the husband and the marriage will have a big problem. :duh:

1. By definition, a wife cannot agree that a husband can force himself on her against her will. That would be a contradiction of terms.

2. That's irrelevant to the question of whether it's rape.

 

[Arthur Brain]

He made the following claim:

Every woman thinks that it is rape if a husband forces himself on his wife.

I asked:

So what? Is the opinion of a woman a necessary precondition for the truth value of a given proposition?

He replies basically by begging the initial question.

At any rate, I'll answer for you and for WoO:

The opinion of any given person is irrelevant to the truth of that thing. It is logically possible for all woman surveyed to hold x, but for not x to be the case.

Simply asserting that all woman surveyed agree that it is rape if a husband forces himself upon his wife is not a proof that it is, in fact, rape.

If you reply in turn that women disagree and will insist that it is rape if their husbands force themselves on them, then you are simply begging the question.

Note, these comments are irrelevant to the question at hand (i.e., is such a thing rape). I am making a purely logical point.

Basic rape education 101:

If someone forces themselves upon another then that be rape Trad.

 

[annabenedetti]

Or how about we ignore the question of who's making the argument or who believes the given proposition, and attend to the actual arguments either for or against the given proposition?

Have you read the OP?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Oh, and please get rid of your daft 'Judge Dredd' avatar Trad. Judge Dreck would be way more apt...

 

[Traditio]

Basic rape education 101:

If someone forces themselves upon another then that be rape Trad.

Again, this begs the question. The question is:

Is it the case that it is rape if a husband forces himself on his wife.

In order to argue that it is, you have to tell me something other than: "But it's rape!"

 

[WizardofOz]

You strongly implied it.

I asked a question. You're failing to remember the genesis of this discussion accurately.

1. By definition, a wife cannot agree that a husband can force himself on her against her will. That would be a contradiction of terms.

2. That's irrelevant to the question of whether it's rape.

She's tired, she's sore, she's menstrating, she's angry with him, etc and tells him that she does not want to have intercourse at this time. He ignores her will and forces her to have sex despite her objection.

Married or not, the nature of what rape is doesn't change.

 

[Traditio]

For what it's worth, I simply don't know the answer to the question:

If you assert that every instance of forcible sexual contact, contrary to the will of the recipient, is rape, then clearly, so called "marital rape" is rape.

If, however, you see rape as the forcible sexual appropriation of what is not one's own, then so called "marital rape" cannot be rape, since one's wife is, in fact, one's own.

There possibly are other ways of looking at it, and I daren't attempt an enumeration of such things. I find the issue confusing, and I don't have at hand the opinions of authorities on the matter.

 

[Rusha]

Oh, and please get rid of your daft 'Judge Dredd' avatar Trad. Judge Dreck would be way more apt...

 

[Traditio]

She's tired, she's sore, she's menstrating, she's angry with him, etc and tells him that she does not want to have intercourse at this time. He ignores her will and forces her to have sex despite her objection.

Married or not, the nature of what rape is doesn't change.

Depends on what rape is, and it depends upon how narrowly or broadly you construe it. I'm inclined to agree with you that it is, but I don't have a compelling argument one way or the other. :idunno:

 

[WizardofOz]

For what it's worth, I simply don't know the answer to the question:

If you assert that every instance of forcible sexual contact, contrary to the will of the recipient, is rape, then clearly, so called "marital rape" is rape.

If, however, you see rape as the forcible sexual appropriation of what is not one's own, then so called "marital rape" cannot be rape, since one's wife is, in fact, one's own.

There possibly are other ways of looking at it, and I daren't attempt an enumeration of such things. I find the issue confusing, and I don't have at hand the opinions of authorities on the matter.

I applaud your humility. :e4e: