Tara Reade who accuses Biden of sexual assault now fears for her life.

[nPeace]

You cited it to excuse spousal rape.

I'm sure you think that, but can you take it to court and win?
You won't win, and here is why. It's not a case of my word against yours, like the girl who consents, and then claims the guy raped her.
We have it in writing.

It's her body. It doesn't matter why she said stop. If he defies her wishes, then it's clearly rape.

In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.

My statement disagrees with your first statement.
With regard to your second statement, you haven't established that claim.

The latter contradicts the former, aside from being wrong. No, you can't retroactively withdraw consent. And you can cite rulings and such, but judges and juries aren't infallible, and legality and morality don't always coincide.

Sorry. I didn't get you clear on that.
Can you rephrase, please. Sorry.

 

[Father Heathen]

I'm sure you think that, but can you take it to court and win?
You won't win, and here is why. It's not a case of my word against yours, like the girl who consents, and then claims the guy raped her.
We have it in writing.

...eh?

In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.

Do you believe this scripture acts as a sort of spell or incantation that magically makes a lack of consent not rape, despite it being the very definition of it?

Sorry. I didn't get you clear on that.
Can you rephrase, please. Sorry.

The decisions of judges, juries, legislators, etc. aren't always rational or ethical.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.

My statement disagrees with your first statement.
With regard to your second statement, you haven't established that claim.

Wow!

And no. Those are biblical teachings only. They do not amount to a legal relinquishing of rights. Even though the Bible says that the woman has lost authority over her body that is not true in reality.

 

[F1fan]

Since when does having authority mean abuse?

I didn't say it does, so irrelevant. Why are you avoiding my question?

Is everyone in authority abusive?

Irrelevant, why aren't you answering my question?

Did you read abuse in that scripture?

Irrelevant.

What does the two becomes one flesh mean to you?

Why didn't you answer my question? If you don't have answerts just be honest and admit it.

To anwser your question being married doesn't mean your physical being belongs to your spouse as if property. If a husband wants to have sex and the wife doesn't, she doesn't have to, and he doesn't have a right to force her.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I don't think it is a good interpretation of the Bible to use it to give the go ahead for spousal rape or that a spouse doesn't have the ability to say no.

 

[nPeace]

...eh?

Do you believe this scripture acts as a sort of spell or incantation that magically makes a lack of consent not rape, despite it being the very definition of it?

We aren't talking about lack of consent.

The decisions of judges, juries, legislators, etc. aren't always rational or ethical.

Do you accept that as applying to yourself?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Wow!

And no. Those are biblical teachings only. They do not amount to a legal relinquishing of rights. Even though the Bible says that the woman has lost authority over her body that is not true in reality.

I'm a little confused on the idea of leaving this to a legal standard, especially coming from an ideology that doesn't want that sort of thing out in the courts.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Wow!

And no. Those are biblical teachings only. They do not amount to a legal relinquishing of rights. Even though the Bible says that the woman has lost authority over her body that is not true in reality.

I don't think the Bible is teaching us that the wife is the property of the husband or that the husband is property of the wife in the sense of control and ownership. Though I realize that some Christian groups seem to look at it that way. I see it as the idea that a husband and wife honor their relationship and keep it between themselves without an obligation to yield if one or the other doesn't feel like commencing physical relations. Viewed the way I'm seeing it in some posts makes it sound like the spouses are forced to the will of the opposite regardless of how they feel. If one or the other rejects the idea of sex, an honorable spouse will agree and not rape the other one.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think the Bible is teaching us that the wife is the property of the husband or that the husband is property of the wife in the sense of control and ownership. Though I realize that some Christian groups seem to look at it that way. I see it as the idea that a husband and wife honor their relationship and keep it between themselves without an obligation to yield if one or the other doesn't feel like commencing physical relations. Viewed the way I'm seeing it in some posts makes it sound like the spouses are forced to the will of the opposite regardless of how they feel. If one or the other rejects the idea of sex, an honorable spouse will agree and not rape the other one.

I agree. Thought that seems to be his interpretation. I am pretty sure that it was not the interpretation of the sect that I belonged to.

 

[nPeace]

Why are you avoiding my question?

Irrelevant, why aren't you answering my question?

Why didn't you answer my question? If you don't have answerts just be honest and admit it.

There isn't one? Then why did you write this in In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.

To highlight that in marriage, the husband are wife are one flesh, and they have both agreed - consented - to give the 'marriage due'.
Depriving each other of that due, is out of harmony with scripture.
That says nothing about having a license to abuse each other.

I thought you followed the Bible, where does it say what you wrote? If a person doesn't have authority over their own body in a marriage, then who does?

1 Corinthians 7:2-5
It answers your question plainly.

Yes, a wife can withhold sex from her husband, and a husband can do the same. They bear responsibility for what results.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I agree. Thought that seems to be his interpretation. I am pretty sure that it was not the interpretation of the sect that I belonged to.

It is difficult for me to tell. There seems to be some ambiguity of the interpretations I'm seeing. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I would never agree that with an interpretation of a woman being subject to the will of her husband regardless of her thoughts on the matter. And vice versa.

As a member of an Evangelical group, I often get the feeling that the view is women in general have less to say about their bodies than what the group has decided. It is not a position I agree with.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I don't agree with the implication that withholding sex results in some negative that the withholder is responsible for. If one or the other is using sex as some sort of weapon to control, manipulate or degrade the other, then it isn't much of a marriage to begin with.

Withholding consent can occur for numerous valid reasons and the other spouse should have the love and devotion to recognize that and not penalize the withholding spouse because they don't feel well or sexy or whatever.

A person has a right to be too tired to have sex and shouldn't have to worry about being penalized for it.

 

[F1fan]

There isn't one? Then why did you write this in In marriage... The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband does; likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.

To highlight that in marriage, the husband are wife are one flesh, and they have both agreed - consented - to give the 'marriage due'.
Depriving each other of that due, is out of harmony with scripture.
That says nothing about having a license to abuse each other.

I thought you followed the Bible, where does it say what you wrote? If a person doesn't have authority over their own body in a marriage, then who does?

1 Corinthians 7:2-5
It answers your question plainly.

It's all absurd. Sure this is religious idealism that is irrelevant in real everyday life. Half of the marriages of your fellow Christians get divorced. So how seriously did they take these Bible quotes? Not very much. So I suggest you go door to door and preach to your fellow Christioans who don't take the Bible as seriously as you do. As soon as you can show us you Christians takes your Bible and interpretation seriously, then you can come back and tell us atheists all about how well it works.

Yes, a wife can withhold sex from her husband, and a husband can do the same. They bear responsibility for what results.

See, mutual respect isn't all that hard, is it? The Bible could have easily stated that. Spouses have authority over their own bodies after all.

 

[nPeace]

It's all absurd. Sure this is religious idealism that is irrelevant in real everyday life. Half of the marriages of your fellow Christians get divorced. So how seriously did they take these Bible quotes? Not very much. So I suggest you go door to door and preach to your fellow Christioans who don't take the Bible as seriously as you do. As soon as you can show us you Christians takes your Bible and interpretation seriously, then you can come back and tell us atheists all about how well it works.

You mistakenly think that fellow Christians are whomever you say they are.

See, mutual respect isn't all that hard, is it? The Bible could have easily stated that. Spouses have authority over their own bodies after all.

That's equivalent to saying, a murderer is free to take your life, because he actually does.
Or, a man is not obligated to pay taxes, because he refuses to.
Hope you see that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mistakenly think that fellow Christians are whomever you say they are.

Careful. This sort of no true Scotsman fallacy can easily backfire. From many of your posts I could see other Christians arguing that you are not a a fellow Christian yourself.

That's equivalent to saying, a murderer is free to take your life, because he actually does.
Or, a man is not obligated to pay taxes, because he refuses to.
Hope you see that.

Wow! Another weird bit of "logic" . I wonder how you can justify those claims?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is difficult for me to tell. There seems to be some ambiguity of the interpretations I'm seeing. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I would never agree that with an interpretation of a woman being subject to the will of her husband regardless of her thoughts on the matter. And vice versa.

As a member of an Evangelical group, I often get the feeling that the view is women in general have less to say about their bodies than what the group has decided. It is not a position I agree with.

I was an AL:C or was it an LCA? The two different Lutheran churches were so similar that now it is one organization. It is not the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. But they are nothing like southern evangelical churches. They are fairly liberal, relatively. The last I heard they were discussing rejoining the Catholic church, but since Catholicism and pot luck dinners seem to be unlikely I do not think that it will ever happen. They would need to find an appropriate blessing for hotdish first.

 

[Twilight Hue]

---

Good lord. She's now ran to Russia exclaiming its a place where she's safe from the Biden administration.

MSN

www.msn.com

I wonder if Snowden has a spare room over there since Russia is really a safe haven now.

 

[Mock Turtle]

---

Good lord. She's now ran to Russia exclaiming its a place where she's safe from the Biden administration.

MSN

www.msn.com

I wonder if Snowden has a spare room over there since Russia is really a safe haven now.

She seems to have very low standards of behaviour.

 

[Father Heathen]

---

Good lord. She's now ran to Russia exclaiming its a place where she's safe from the Biden administration.

MSN

www.msn.com

I wonder if Snowden has a spare room over there since Russia is really a safe haven now.

That's a red flag, no pun intended.

 

[Father Heathen]

Do you accept that as applying to yourself?

I'm human, but I try to look at everything objectively and to think critically. Some avoid doing this because their worldview would immediately crumble. Views based on logic and evidence are more valid than those that are not.