In my mind, if it wasn’t violent or you didn’t cry for help, that wasn’t rape, that was fornication. If it was violent and you did cry out, it was still only rape if you didn’t happen to belong to your assailant (Deut. 22:23-24).
Rape was a one-time thing, a life and death situation, not something that happens with people who love you, and certainly not from your own husband. Marital rape? No such thing!
Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/removingthefigleaf/2016/08/i-let-my-husband-rape-me/#0uMKbvLJUMH2cWWu.99
The Benevolent Thou 
Dec 25, 2017 @ 11:44:00
True and the brainwashing goes so deep that many people now think this as somehow “cruel” or “barbaric”. The fact that anyone would think that [nonviolent] sex within marriage – “consent or no consent” could ever be “barbaric” is the thing that is truly sick. Sex is a guaranteed privilege to your spouse in marriage.
The Bible says, “a man must not refuse his wife and a wife must not refuse her husband”.
Certain conditions including no sex during menstruation are specifically made.
God was NOT quiet on this issue. Rape within marriage is impossible. If a woman refuses, it is HER breaking the law of God, not the man for moving forward. If you don’t believe that, then you don’t believe the Bible.
If a wife would refuse her husband, she has broken the pact of marriage and assumed the man can find another woman to have sex with. It is evil for a woman to refuse her husband knowing fair well there is no recourse. Therefore there should be recourse – every man should be allowed to take a concubine in sex for every time that his wife refuses him sex.
A man made a commitment in marriage “I will have sex with you and you only”, and “even when you are old and ugly I still won’t have sex with other women”. This is on the assumption that he can actually have sex from her. If she will refuse him sex then he should be allowed to take a concubine and have sex with her instead. If this hurts the wife emotionally, this is her just and fair punishment for her breaking of the marriage covenant. If she wants to divorce him after, good luck finding another husband now that she is old, ugly, and used. Meanwhile it is not hard for an older man to find a younger woman than his wife.
LikeLike
Dec 25, 2017 @ 13:40:28
Hi, Logical, so glad you dropped in. There is much to unpack in your post and I’m sure that you’re up for debate.
I’ll agree, first, that it is certainly your right under the Constitution to believe whatever you want and follow the tenets of whatever religion you follow (until it attempts to override another person’s beliefs and practices in matters of religion).
The fact that anyone would think that [nonviolent] sex within marriage – “consent or no consent” could ever be “barbaric” is the thing that is truly sick. Sex is a guaranteed privilege to your spouse in marriage.
Fascinating. “Consent or no consent?” If a husband takes his wife without her consent, by action or words, is unethical and immoral, regardless of what is written in the pages of “holy” books. Any god that would approve such an action is an immoral god.
“sex is a guaranteed privilege to your spouse in marriage”
This is true, biblical or not. But the operative word is “privilege,” which is not a right.
“a man must not refuse his wife and a wife must not refuse her husband”.
First, this “quote” does not seem not seem to be in the Bible.
Secondly, this view is logically inconsistent and constitutes a dilemma. What if a husband wants sex but the wife does not? According to your “quote,” she must accede to his desire to have sex. But also according to this, the husband must accede to her desire not to have sex.
Rape within marriage is impossible.
First, I’d like for you to define “rape.” Can a husband take his wife forcefully without it being rape?
This is one of the many reasons I think that the Bible, especially the OT, is immoral, and I am very, very happy that Marital rape is against the law in all States.
If you don’t believe that, then you don’t believe the Bible.
I’d say that is a good point, and quiet true.
every man should be allowed to take a concubine in sex for every time that his wife refuses him sex.
I think that biblical proposition pertains only if the wife is barren. Check it out.
[Marriage] is on the assumption that he can actually have sex from her.
So, if a couple decide to marry and have loving relationship but without sex, is it a valid marriage in you view? This does happen, though rarely. Marriage must not be only about sex.
If she wants to divorce him after, good luck finding another husband now that she is old, ugly, and used.
I find it difficult to express my thoughts about that attitude and remain civil. It is at best one of the most disparaging, contemptuous, condescending views I’ve ever heard concerning a man’s opinion of the worth of all women.
Please, sincerely try to understand why I said that. You are talking about human beings, not things that you use only for sex and have the right to throw them away at will.
LikeLike