# Marital rape a myth?



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

No one actually believes that a wife/partner can't say no to sex, right? This can't a commonly held belief. Can it? 

From the link: "But one piece of advice given last week by Biblical Gender Roles writer Larry Solomon wasn't just antiquated, but also highly offensive and damaging: Solomon asserted that husbands "should not tolerate" their wives' refusal to have sex, essentially endorsing marital rape by doing so, Raw Story reported Monday."

http://www.mic.com/articles/127405/...=WHFacebook&ts_pid=2&utm_content=inf_10_285_2

More from the same loon:

"Christian Husbands â let me be crystal clear here. The situation I am addressing in this post is not your wife occasionally turning you down for sex (even with a bad attitude, as opposed to for health or other legitimate reasons). What I am addressing here is the wife who consistently and routinely denies her husband sexually simply because she does not need sex as much or she thinks she should not have to do it except when she is in the mood or she thinks her husband should have to earn sex with her by âputting her in the moodâ by doing various things she expects or likes."

http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/05/23/8-steps-to-confront-your-wifes-sexual-refusal/


----------



## Oldshep (Mar 28, 2015)

Of course marital rape is possible, but Solomon's assertion that husbands should not tolerate their wive's refusal to have sex does not "endorse rape". That just seems like a leap to me. Trying to stir up some political points by interpreting the quote in the most offensive way.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Oldshep said:


> Of course marital rape is possible, but Solomon's assertion that husbands should not tolerate their wive's refusal to have sex does not "endorse rape". That just seems like a leap to me. Trying to stir up some political points by interpreting the quote in the most offensive way.


I didn't say that, the author of the article I linked did. However, if a woman says no to sex, it's rape. Period. 

How can you read both the links and say that the loon, Larry Solomon, states that beyond physical limitation (brief amounts of time) that a wife/partner doesn't have the right to say no to sex?


----------



## Oldshep (Mar 28, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> I didn't say that, the author of the article I linked did. However, if a woman says no to sex, it's rape. Period.
> 
> How can you read both the links and say that the loon, Larry Solomon, states that beyond physical limitation (brief amounts of time) that a wife/partner doesn't have the right to say no to sex?


If a woman says no then it's rape, sure. But if a wife continually says no then there's a problem in the marriage and Solomon suggests that a husband shouldnt tolerate that.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

YOU nailed it when you said LOON!!

Unfortunately, man (humans in general, but human men in this case) likes to TWIST Scripture to suit THEIR needs, wants, desires.

This is a sick, twisted, manipulation of Scripture.

Ephesians 5: 25-33
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 
_Christ, gave His Life, for "the church". He was willing to die, for the Church (that is the body of believers)_

26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 

28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church&#8212; 
_Pretty obvious. Men feed themselves, care for themselves, etc......they are Commanded to love their wives in the same way._

30 for we are members of his body. 

31 &#8220;For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.&#8221;
_That means no MIL or FIL or any other 'family issues'. HE stands by his wife, the end._

32 This is a profound mystery&#8212;but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.


Funny; Scripture gives wives one sentence. Men? they get a whole paragraph.
The one sentence God gives a wife is EASY TO DO when the men, do the whole paragraph Commanded of them.

Rape, is rape.
Married, living together, etc.
Rape is not a sex crime......it is a crime of power, control, violence, that just happens to have sex involved.
Rape DOES occur in marriages, partnerships, etc.
ANY TIME one person if forced to have sex with another person against their will; is rape.
The End.
Period.
It's rape.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Oldshep said:


> If a woman says no then it's rape, sure. But if a wife continually says no then there's a problem in the marriage and Solomon suggests that a husband shouldnt tolerate that.


So he can force sex on her... What part of the bolded quote from the article is in the least bit ambiguous? 

"*If a husband decides to have sex with his wife against her will*, *he should*, Solomon advised, focus his eyes "on her body, not her face" and "concentrate 100% on the physical side." He added that, "*Sometimes we have to work around the sinful behavior of our wives and this will be one of those times*."

By stating that consent is not required of married women, Solomon effectively argues that marital rape is permissible. It's a stance he's taken before, as Raw Story notes: In May, he explicitly wrote "*there is no such thing as marital rape*."


----------



## Oldshep (Mar 28, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> So he can force sex on her... What part of the bolded quote from the article is in the least bit ambiguous?
> 
> "*If a husband decides to have sex with his wife against her will*, *he should*, Solomon advised, focus his eyes "on her body, not her face" and "concentrate 100% on the physical side." He added that, "*Sometimes we have to work around the sinful behavior of our wives and this will be one of those times*."
> 
> By stating that consent is not required of married women, Solomon effectively argues that marital rape is permissible. It's a stance he's taken before, as Raw Story notes: In May, he explicitly wrote "*there is no such thing as marital rape*."



So whats wrong with concentrating on her body? Anyway I think that if a wife doesnt really want to, she should pretend to be into it and it'll be over faster. If she has a scowl on, its just going to draw the whole thing on longer.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

HOLD THE PHONE JAMONE:

1. Rebuke her privately?
Rebuke means: express sharp disapproval or criticism of (someone) because of their behavior or actions:
What?
How about maybe sit down and talk. 
How about "look in the mirror and check yourself first".

2. Rebuke her in front of witnesses?
WHAT????
Ok, so humiliate her and that will get her turned on?
Christian counselor?
Oh, I have personal experience w/ a 'Bibilical Counselor".
My REAL doctor told me he did JUST AS MUCH if not MORE damage to me than my ex.

3. Bring her before the Church?
WHAT a gross bastardization of Scripture. 
I'd like to punch this guy in the face.

4. Stop taking her on dates and trips?
OK punish her? Like a child? Like property?
What?

5. No unnessacary home upgrades?
This is so unreal. This is so unreal.....
This is ABUSE ABUSE ABUSE.

6. Stop doing little extra things.
Because good chances are the reason why you are not getting porn queen sex is because of how he makes her feel in the first place.
OMGosh this is grooming women to accept abuse.
THIS IS NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT what Jesus taught.

7. Remove her funding?
What.
This is financial abuse.

8. Divorce?
AAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDD God's Word says He Hates Divorce.
THE END.

This guy is a friggin' monster. A MONSTER
THIS IS NOT GOD'S WORD.
This is his sick disgusting manipulation of Scripture. 
THIS article and author is NOT from God.

What this clown is advocating is ABUSE!!!!!!!!


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Oldshep said:


> So whats wrong with concentrating on her body? Anyway I think that if a wife doesnt really want to, she should pretend to be into it and it'll be over faster. If she has a scowl on, its just going to draw the whole thing on longer.


THAT IS NOT Scriptural.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Oldshep said:


> So whats wrong with concentrating on her body? Anyway I think that if a wife doesnt really want to, she should pretend to be into it and it'll be over faster. If she has a scowl on, its just going to draw the whole thing on longer.


Should *all* rape victims "just pretend to be into it" so it's over faster? Or just the women in relationships?

Thank you for so completely announcing the type of person you are.


----------



## Oldshep (Mar 28, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> THAT IS NOT Scriptural.


It's implied.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Some women use sex as a reward/punishment system to get what they want from a man, and as long as he keeps making money and doing what he's told, the sex keeps happening right? :whistlin:
Unfortunately, it happens more than a person would think, then of course, hubby is more likely to stray, so he's a dirty cheat.
Ron White once said "I'm a pretty good dog, but if you don't pet me every once in a while, it's hard to keep me under the porch."
If she continually says no, the problems go beyond just sex, and it's time to move on.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

I'm not sure why you cherry picked this article when there are thousands of cases of muslim raping women, wives and little boys.
It's every day acceptable to them.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> HOLD THE PHONE JAMONE:
> 
> 1. Rebuke her privately?
> Rebuke means: express sharp disapproval or criticism of (someone) because of their behavior or actions:
> ...


Here are the loon's steps to make your wife obey with "god" sanctioned rules: 

http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/10/03/7-ways-to-discipline-your-wife/


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Oldshep said:


> It's implied.


What?

Please explain?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> I'm not sure why you cherry picked this article when there are thousands of cases of muslim raping women, wives and little boys.
> It's every day acceptable to them.


We're not talking about muslims right now. Please try to keep up, or make your thread about them.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Here are the loon's steps to make your wife obey with "god" sanctioned rules:
> 
> http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/10/03/7-ways-to-discipline-your-wife/



I cannot emphasis enough..........this man is off his rocker.
THIS IS NOT what Jesus taught, period, the end.

Just like radical muslims DO NOT represent true muslims, and it's unfair to paint all who claim islam as their religious choice; this evil filled man does NOT represent TRUE Scripture.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> We're not talking about muslims right now. Please try to keep up, or make your thread about them.


I thought we were talking about marital rape?


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Cornhusker said:


> I'm not sure why you cherry picked this article when there are thousands of cases of muslim raping women, wives and little boys.
> It's every day acceptable to them.


How versed are you in Scripture.
THIS is not as much about marital rape, as it is about some butt clown MISUSING GOD'S WORD to justify it.

Let HIS Word, Speak.
Not ours.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> Some women use sex as a reward/punishment system to get what they want from a man, and as long as he keeps making money and doing what he's told, the sex keeps happening right? :whistlin:
> Unfortunately, it happens more than a person would think, then of course, hubby is more likely to stray, so he's a dirty cheat.
> Ron White once said "I'm a pretty good dog, but if you don't pet me every once in a while, it's hard to keep me under the porch."
> If she continually says no, the problems go beyond just sex, and it's time to move on.


So that gives the guy the right to force sex? Is that what you're saying? If the relationship is that broken wouldn't it be better to just leave rather than rape her?


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I heard years ago about martial rape. The answer at the time was the hot grits technique . Wife makes a big pot of grits and pours it on the mans privates. Grits stick and cant be wiped off easily.:grin:


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

> Yes, I'm baiting you because your thread is ridiculous.


It is not ridiculous.

Do *I* think she posted it because she hates everything about christianity?
Yes.

HOWEVER: if this was my only knowledge / view of christianity, I'd hate it too.

This guy is an butt clown.
He's a liar, manipulator, and controlled by the evil one. 
THE END.
This is NOT from God......this is NOT what His Word says.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> I didn't say that, the author of the article I linked did. However, if a woman says no to sex, it's rape. Period.
> 
> How can you read both the links and say that the loon, Larry Solomon, states that beyond physical limitation (brief amounts of time) that a wife/partner doesn't have the right to say no to sex?





Laura Zone 10 said:


> YOU nailed it when you said LOON!!
> 
> Unfortunately, man (humans in general, but human men in this case) likes to TWIST Scripture to suit THEIR needs, wants, desires.
> 
> ...



Scripture is easy if you don't try and twist it and if you read more than a few words at a time.
Jesus was an expert at this, He was constantly confronted by the scripture lawyers, the Pharisees.

God doesn't endorse rape, neither do disciples of Christ.
God also doesn't make marriage with a cruel guard. He explicitly tells both parties how to have a loving marriage. You either listen and follow His advice or you don't and suffer the consequences.
It's your choice.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> How versed are you in Scripture.
> THIS is not as much about marital rape, as it is about some butt clown MISUSING GOD'S WORD to justify it.
> 
> Let HIS Word, Speak.
> Not ours.


People have been misusing Gods words since they were put in The Book.
I think that's probably the false prophets we were warned about.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> So that gives the guy the right to force sex? Is that what you're saying? If the relationship is that broken wouldn't it be better to just leave rather than rape her?


I didn't say anybody should force sex on anybody, and if I hinted at it, you need to point it out.
In fact, I was agreeing with you, which you'd see if you actually bothered to read what I said.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Cornhusker said:


> People have been misusing Gods words since they were put in The Book.
> I think that's probably the false prophets we were warned about.


But if no one sets the record straight.......then their perception and belief will be based upon falsehood.

I know the bait. I see it all the time.
However, this one touches a nerve with me because I have first hand experience with a 'Biblical counselor' that I saw, trusted and followed his "advice" that he thinly wrapped in Scripture.......
And it was similiar to this BS site she has posted.

Abuse is abuse.
I don't care what you wrap it up with; it's abuse.

I hope by posting Truth and Facts that expose the lies in this article can help ONE woman trapped in the abuse cycle, that's made EVEN WORSE when it is veiled with "being a Biblical wife".


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> It is not ridiculous.
> 
> Do *I* think she posted it because she hates everything about christianity?
> Yes.
> ...


I don't hate christianity. I loathe hypocrisy. And this a prime example of cherry picking a religion to control another person, *and* have it deemed acceptable because of scripture. Like I've said all along- anyone can cherry pick and spin scripture (of any religion) into meaning anything they want it to. 

I didn't go looking for the original article, it popped up on my Facebook feed. I read it, and posted it here to point out the hypocrisy I've seen for years.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> I didn't say anybody should force sex on anybody, and if I hinted at it, you need to point it out.
> In fact, I was agreeing with you, which you'd see if you actually bothered to read what I said.


Well, I guess you could have been saying that it's OK for a man to cheat because he can't control himself... but you still didn't say that marital rape is wrong, did you?


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> I don't hate christianity. I loathe hypocrisy.


Then you loathe humanity
We are all hypocrites in one way or another.



> And this a prime example of cherry picking a religion to control another person, *and* have it deemed acceptable because of scripture. Like I've said all along- anyone can cherry pick and spin scripture into meaning anything they want it to.


Hold onto your chair............I absolutely agree with you.
USING a religion to control, belittle, abuse another human is reprehensible.
The 3rd Commandment "you shall NOT misuse the Name of God".
This is a GROSS misuse of His Name.



> I didn't go looking for the original article, it popped up on my Facebook feed. I read it, and posted it here to point out the hypocrisy I've seen for years.


Yes, those cults that claim they are 'christian' (much like Westboro) are 'wolves' in sheeps clothing.
This is a GREAT thread for those who know Him and His Word, to share what is True......and correct the false.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> We're not talking about muslims right now. Please try to keep up, or make your thread about them.


Maybe you change the title to "Christian marital rape" then. Next week you can fix the Muslims if you want.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mreynolds said:


> Maybe you change the title to "Christian marital rape" then. Next week you can fix the Muslims if you want.


The request was made to replace "martial" with "marital" within a minute of posting of the thread. Are you going to mock spelling errors now? That's not nice.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Since you're new- I was raped when I was 12.


I am old, and I did not know.
I am so sorry.

Thank you for your openness. 
This topic is one I am all too familiar with.
Hence my very very 'colorful, animated, and passionate' responses.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> The request was made to replace "martial" with "marital" within a minute of posting of the thread. Are you going to mock spelling errors now? That's not nice.


I am the last one that will critize :icecream: for spelling errors. You told FB that this thread was about Christian marital rape and not Muslim marital rape and for him to stay on topic. 

Its like you care not whether Muslim women get raped. Just Christian women. I know that isn't so but If I didn't know you already that's what I would have seen.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

After reading the article, do some Christians actually follow this type of direction? I'm asking because I can't see my family and friends that are Christians living their lives in this manner.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> Well, I guess you could have been saying that it's OK for a man to cheat because he can't control himself... but you still didn't say that marital rape is wrong, did you?


Well of course it's wrong
Rape is rape, and it's wrong.
I didn't mean it's "ok to cheat", I just pointed out that when a woman uses her sex as a weapon, it's very likely hubs won't stick around.
Abuse actually can be wife on husband.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I am old, and I did not know.
> I am so sorry.
> 
> Thank you for your openness.
> ...


Once you have been sexually assaulted any mention of forced sex tends to make you animated. 

And I'm sorry about what happened to you as well. It's never forgotten.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

The thread makes me grin.

Just had a conversation with a woman this morning, who is planning her wedding. No, she doesn't love the guy, but she needs health insurance.

She gets what she wants, I'm guessing he gets what he wants.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mreynolds said:


> I am the last one that will critize :icecream: for spelling errors. You told FB that this thread was about Christian marital rape and not Muslim marital rape and for him to stay on topic.
> 
> Its like you care not whether Muslim women get raped. Just Christian women. I know that isn't so but If I didn't know you already that's what I would have seen.


Are you serious? I advocate for every _person_ on the planet that is raped. No one should be violated in such a way. No one.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> The thread makes me grin.
> 
> Just had a conversation with a woman this morning, who is planning her wedding. No, she doesn't love the guy, but she needs health insurance.
> 
> She gets what she wants, I'm guessing he gets what he wants.


Rape makes you grin? Do you agree with the loon that forced marital sex is fine and dandy?


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

no really said:


> After reading the article, do some Christians actually follow this type of direction? I'm asking because I can't see my family and friends that are Christians living their lives in this manner.


I am with you on that. I know of no one whether Christian or atheist that does that. But how can you really know? People who are raped usually never say anything. In a marriage it makes it even harder I would guess. 

With so many domestic abuse calls I go on I suspect it happens more often than we would like to think. But unlike some people who like to label others I tend to believe that the person who does this does so because of what's inside their heart and any old excuse to do it will suffice. An alcoholic may drink because his lawn mower wont start and that makes him/her have a bad day. Doesn't mean we should all hate on lawn mowers. 

Most domestic abuse emt calls I have been on I haven't seen any crosses on the walls. Some yes but not most.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> Once you have been sexually assaulted any mention of forced sex tends to make you animated.
> 
> And I'm sorry about what happened to you as well. It's never forgotten.


I'm sorry for what happened to you (both of you)
My nieces were sexually molested when they were young by a guy everybody liked and trusted.
I don't have first hand experience with sexual abuse, but I've seen what it did to my brother's girls.
My uncle told my mom that the guy who published the local paper "got to him" before he was 5 years old. By the time he told anybody, the offender had been dead 40 years.
People who molest children should be shot immediately following the trial.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

no really said:


> After reading the article, do some Christians actually follow this type of direction? I'm asking because I can't see my family and friends that are Christians living their lives in this manner.


Here's his website, apparently he has a large following. 

http://biblicalgenderroles.com/


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

no really said:


> After reading the article, do some Christians actually follow this type of direction? I'm asking because I can't see my family and friends that are Christians living their lives in this manner.


Yes.
You would be stunned and amazed.

In 2011, my ex was referred to a large church in a small town close to ours.
The man he worked with was an engineer w/ a medical company. 
Married professional man, wife, 5-6 kids.
He also referred us to the "pastor" who was also a Biblical counselor.

(( This was after this man found out my ex was sleeping with a co-worker for 8 months behind my back ))

This church was huge.
Had 2-300 people in the pews every Sunday.
Dressed from jeans and graphic T's to dresses and suits.
Very "modern" worship.
SO it all looked 'pretty normal'.

We started seeing the counsleor.
The first 2-3 weeks.....seemed just fine.
We were given a work book, and a book to read together and answer on our own.
My answers were paragraphs long, his were a word or two.
I found that disconcerning.
When I mentioned it to the pastor; THEN is when I got the gut feeling of "what the h. e. double is going on".......

About week 5, is when *I* got the blame for the affair because I was not a good enough wife. 
That if *I* had done this or that, it would have never happened, then read some Scripture to back it up.
He praised my ex for 'his progress' yet chastised me for being 'unforgiving'.

HIS 3 steps to forgiveness?
1. NEVER talk to anyone about what he did to me or how I was feeling.
2. NEVER talk to ex about what he did to me or how I was feeling.
3. NEVER THINK about what the ex did to me and dismiss my feelings.....

And I wanted to be a Biblical wife, and I tried to apply these principals.
It didn't work.

The pastor also said my ex's 30 year long porn addiction was my fault, for not being a good enough wife.......
(so from age 13 to 19, was my fault?? I didn't meet him till he was 19, 6 years into his addiction)
ETA: He also accused me of being "jealous" of his porn......what? I puked in my mouth.

So my life consisted of:
Insomnia (1-2 hours a night sleep......for days on end)
Flashbacks
Hopeless disspair to the point of suicide
Could not think straight or make a decision.
Inappropriate startle response (at times, I would wet my pants)
Halluecinations / hearing voices
Panic attacks that woudl drop me to the floor
Depression where I would not get off the couch or shower for days in a row......

But by God I had to 'fulfill' my wifely duty.....like it or not.

The stress caused me to lose 20lbs.....from 133lbs to 113lbs
I ruptured a disc. I could not walk w/o a cane.
I had to be helped on and off the toilet.
And disspite my serious injury, my body was violated for his pleasure.

After ONE YEAR of living like this: I finally broke silence and talked to my GP.
As she sat and listened, she began to weep.........then she got mad.
PTSD and major depression.......that's what was wrong w/ me.....
She said what that "Bibilical pastor/counselor" did was as bad or if not worse than the initial trauma in 2011 and the second blow in 2012.

This church was full of regular folks. 
Well they looked regular.......
This oppressive abusive maniuplation of God's Word is more common than you think.......

In January 2014, I stumbled across a place in a town next to me that was free, anonymous, and I could talk to someone.
The advocate there told me to come to group.......
I was not alone.
And religion was used OFTEN to hold women captive and in the abuse cycle.
I thank God for outreaches for abused women.
I would still be stuck in the cycle w/o it.......


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Are you serious? I advocate for every _person_ on the planet that is raped. No one should be violated in such a way. No one.


Then why did _*YOU*_ shut him down for mentioning marital rape of Muslims that according to him is accepted by that belief? 

And do you read all of my posts? Didn't _*I *_say that I knew that would not advocate that? Why do you get all in a tizzy when you cant even read all of my post with comprehension? 

If you want to talk about marital rape and bring it to the forefront, then ALL marital rape should be talked about. If you just stop the Christians from doing it then there are millions more that need help. 

Why does your agenda have to start on one topic but really be a different agenda in reality? Then you [try and] deflect innocently.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> I'm sorry for what happened to you (both of you)
> My nieces were sexually molested when they were young by a guy everybody liked and trusted.
> I don't have first hand experience with sexual abuse, but I've seen what it did to my brother's girls.
> My uncle told my mom that the guy who published the local paper "got to him" before he was 5 years old. By the time he told anybody, the offender had been dead 40 years.
> People who molest children should be shot immediately following the trial.


Thank you. One in five women has been sexually assaulted, I personally think that number is higher. I didn't talk about it for almost 40 years, I never told my parents or anyone else, because in 1974 it would have been my fault. Even tho I was just walking across a field at school thinking about an upcoming horse show. 

I can't imagine imagine what your nieces, or uncle, went through. And I agree that people who molest children should be shot.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Thank you. One in five women has been sexually assaulted, I personally think that number is higher. I didn't talk about it for almost 40 years, I never told my parents or anyone else, because in 1974 it would have been my fault. Even tho I was just walking across a field at school thinking about an upcoming horse show.
> 
> I can't imagine imagine what your nieces, or uncle, went through. And I agree that people who molest children should be shot.


Yes that is the problem with rape. Especially marital rape. Not many want to come forth because we are taught that "we may have had a hand in it". That has been changing much over the last decade but marital rape is still lagging somewhat. 

This is a good thread to talk about if we all stay on topic.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mreynolds said:


> Yes that is the problem with rape. Especially marital rape. Not many want to come forth because we are taught that "we may have had a hand in it". That has been changing much over the last decade but marital rape is still lagging somewhat.
> 
> *This is a good thread to talk about if we all stay on topic*.


I absolutely agree.

People need to understand WHAT rape is.......

So many people STILL think "abuse" means black eyes and broken bones, and that's it.
Yes, physical abuse IS abuse, but that's not the only type of abuse.

It's about educating people.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I absolutely agree.
> 
> People need to understand WHAT rape is.......
> 
> ...


Yes we understand each other completely. I understand_ firsthand_ about both rape and abuse victims. That was a long time ago and didn't even talk about it until a few years ago. But I did realize that its the power trip that gets them going and not any God. If I go to a church and the pastor tells me to do what the OP did I would probably end up with an assault charge. For those that do follow them they were already that way but just got another excuse to do it. 

Its not acceptable in this society anymore. It once was you know. Other societies will follow suit as you cant keep people trapped in a situation they don't want to be in.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

I do find it troubling that someone would try to slander the Christian faith as written in the Bible with some whacko's writings. It seems to me that the OP is using this whacko just because they can and that is terribly sad. No where is it written in the Bible that a man can do whatever they might want to with his wife but the OP wants to chip away at the Word with this nonsensical implication that "Christians do this". I find this extremely offensive and would have this thread closed as a baseless attack on the Christian Faith. The OP has made her opinion of the Christian faith known, I would ask that they not be given a soapbox to offend countless Christian members and the Christian guests that visit this website.

If the OP wants to address Marital Rape without offending the Christian Faith then have at it, those that would rape a woman in what ever situation are wrong. I am just saying this is not just a Christian thing so it needs to be identified as such and leave the written Word out of it.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mreynolds said:


> Yes we understand each other completely. I understand_ firsthand_ about both rape and abuse victims. That was a long time ago and didn't even talk about it until a few years ago. But I did realize that its the power trip that gets them going and not any God. If I go to a church and the pastor tells me to do what the OP did I would probably end up with an assault charge. For those that do follow them they were already that way but just got another excuse to do it.
> 
> Its not acceptable in this society anymore. It once was you know. Other societies will follow suit as you cant keep people trapped in a situation they don't want to be in.


I am truly sorry for what happened to you. I disagree that religion doesn't play a part tho. It's used to justify all types of abuse, and for many people it is an acceptable reason.

Do all members of all religions use it to justify abuse? Absolutely not. But it is used, and it is wrong. I'm not saying that people of no religion never abuse others either. I'm calling out the hypocrisy of using a religion to justify abuse. 

The fact that this loon has a following proves that there are people that believe the bible justifies abuse.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

This is a very personal topic and people are opening up with very personal things that have happened to them.

Debate is ok, but please do not say anything other than supportive words when it addresses a member's trauma.

Comments have been made that may have been sincere or may have been passive aggressive (others were more overt). I erred on the side of caution with deletions because of the sensitivity of the subject matter.

If you think a reply may be too personal, it probably is.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Shine said:


> I do find it troubling that someone would try to slander the Christian faith as written in the Bible with some whacko's writings. It seems to me that the OP is using this whacko just because they can and that is terribly sad. No where is it written in the Bible that a man can do whatever they might want to with his wife but the OP wants to chip away at the Word with this nonsensical implication that "Christians do this". I find this extremely offensive and would have this thread closed as a baseless attack on the Christian Faith. The OP has made her opinion of the Christian faith known, I would ask that they not be given a soapbox to offend countless Christian members and the Christian guests that visit this website.


Yes and what is not taken into consideration is this. When the bible was written women were not more than property to the man. A way for him to have kids and to populate with his genes. Consider Monarchy's and tell me it isn't so. Killing a woman for not giving him a boy was common. These teachings at time of those writings were cutting edge outright against these practices against women but haven't yet evolved into what we have evolved into today. Its still evolving and we still have a ways to go yet. To me, its as inane to criticize something from 2000 years ago as it is to still follow it to the "t".

I can imagine someone 2000 years in the future saying MLK was a bad man because he didn't do enough for the equality of blacks as he should have. 

I can totally see that.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Shine said:


> I do find it troubling that someone would try to slander the Christian faith as written in the Bible with some whacko's writings. It seems to me that the OP is using this whacko just because they can and that is terribly sad. No where is it written in the Bible that a man can do whatever they might want to with his wife but the OP wants to chip away at the Word with this nonsensical implication that "Christians do this". I find this extremely offensive and would have this thread closed as a baseless attack on the Christian Faith. The OP has made her opinion of the Christian faith known, I would ask that they not be given a soapbox to offend countless Christian members and the Christian guests that visit this website.


And I find it sad that that the loon has a following of people that can justify abuse. He does tho, and those people believe they are christian, following scripture and it's teachings. 

It's not baseless, this loon and his followers exist. They say they are christians and are following their faith. 

As far as I know I'm allowed an opinion even if it is different than yours (collective christians). Your belief doesn't trump my non belief.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> And I find it sad that that the loon has a following of people that can justify abuse. He does tho, and those people believe they are christian, following scripture and it's teachings.
> 
> It's not baseless, this loon and his followers exist. They say they are christians and are following their faith.
> 
> As far as I know I'm allowed an opinion even if it is different than yours (collective christians). Your belief doesn't trump my non belief.


OK, if your intent is to ATTACK Christianity, show me where it says specifically in the Bible that this is accepted - if you cannot do this then you are using this whacko to further your AGENDA of ATTACKING Christianity.

I find that shallow and dishonest.

"As far as I know I'm allowed an opinion even if it is different than yours (collective christians). Your belief doesn't trump my non belief."

Is it OK to offend a sincere and substantial belief of another that does not harm you with your opinion? Are you doing this in a "loving" fashion or are you doing this in a "hateful" manner?


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> I am truly sorry for what happened to you. I disagree that religion doesn't play a part tho. It's used to justify all types of abuse, and for many people it is an acceptable reason.
> 
> Do all members of all religions use it to justify abuse? Absolutely not. But it is used, and it is wrong. I'm not saying that people of no religion never abuse others either. I'm calling out the hypocrisy of using a religion to justify abuse.
> 
> The fact that this loon has a following proves that there are people that believe the bible justifies abuse.


Thank you but there is no need for you to be sorry. Like you, it has helped make me who I am. I know where the blame lies. I also agree that someone who uses something to try and teach others is very wrong. There are agendas from some people and they use a church to accomplish these. And they do have followers and its tragic. But most often these people start these churchs to further their own agenda and attract like people. There are many church's that have God as the least of their agenda. That doesn't mean they all do. 

Its why I tend to look at the crime individually and not collectively. If it makes you understand better, I am a Christian but I don't attend church. I have yet to find one that suits me without an ounce of stain. I will never find that so I just do my own thing instead. Like we all do. Its neither right or wrong its just my way.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> Yes and what is not taken into consideration is this. When the bible was written women were not more than property to the man. A way for him to have kids and to populate with his genes. Consider Monarchy's and tell me it isn't so. Killing a woman for not giving him a boy was common. These teachings at time of those writings were cutting edge outright against these practices against women but haven't yet evolved into what we have evolved into today. Its still evolving and we still have a ways to go yet. To me, its as inane to criticize something from 2000 years ago as it is to still follow it to the "t".
> 
> I can imagine someone 2000 years in the future saying MLK was a bad man because he didn't do enough for the equality of blacks as he should have.
> 
> I can totally see that.


Yes, women have been treated in many different fashions throughout history. The Bible addresses the treatment of women with respect and love, nothing more. People want to imply what the statement "Wives should submit themselves to their Husbands..." means with many incorrect fallacies to support their agenda of hatred. This will never end and should be attacked every time it rears it's ugly head...

I know that the loon that is being referenced will get his due based on how God works, I would have it that God shows him the true meaning of how a wife should be treated.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Shine said:


> OK, if your intent is to ATTACK Christianity, show me where it says specifically in the Bible that this is accepted - if you cannot do this then you are using this whacko to further your AGENDA of ATTACKING Christianity.
> 
> I find that shallow and dishonest.


Ain't it great to have an opinion? 

I didn't attack christianity, I pointed out the loon's hypocrisy. He says he is christian, and uses the teachings (specific scripture) to justify marital rape and other abuse, doesn't he? He also has a large following that think the same thing, or they wouldn't be following him. 

Just to be perfectly clear, I am against all rape, sexual assault, and abuse no matter what religion, creed, non belief, etc. one is.


----------



## Narshalla (Sep 11, 2008)

mreynolds said:


> Then why did _*YOU*_ shut him down for mentioning marital rape of Muslims that according to him is accepted by that belief?
> 
> And do you read all of my posts? Didn't _*I *_say that I knew that would not advocate that? Why do you get all in a tizzy when you cant even read all of my post with comprehension?
> 
> ...


She shut him down because he wasn't interested in talking about marital rape justified by the Muslim religion, he was only interested in derailing the discussion of marital rape as advocated by the 'pastor' in the article that was linked to in the original post.

It's one thing to broaden a debate to include extra details or valid points of view, but that's not what he was doing, and you know it. All he was doing was trying to shut the debate down using the argument of "If you really cared about (subject) you'd care about it on my terms."

That's it. He doesn't care about the topic at all, he's just here to derail the conversation. Maybe _you_ want to broaden the discussion -- but for some reason, I don't think so.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Ain't it great to have an opinion?
> 
> I didn't attack christianity, I pointed out the loon's hypocrisy. He says he is christian, and uses the teachings (specific scripture) to justify marital rape and other abuse, doesn't he? He also has a large following that think the same thing, or they wouldn't be following him.
> 
> Just to be perfectly clear, I am against all rape, sexual assault, and abuse no matter what religion, creed, non belief, etc. one is.


"The inclusion of one is the exclusion of all others" The Rule of Statutory Construction. 

Um... by the fashion that you have presented this you are specifically attacking Christianity.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Narshalla said:


> She shut him down because he wasn't interested in talking about marital rape justified by the Muslim religion, he was only interested in derailing the discussion of marital rape as advocated by the 'pastor' in the article that was linked to in the original post.
> 
> It's one thing to broaden a debate to include extra details or valid points of view, but that's not what he was doing, and you know it. All he was doing was trying to shut the debate down using the argument of "If you really cared about (subject) you'd care about it on my terms."
> 
> That's it. He doesn't care about the topic at all, he's just here to derail the conversation. Maybe _you_ want to broaden the discussion -- but for some reason, I don't think so.


Well I have to hand it to you. If anyone can get voice inflection understood in a thread it has to be you. So you read his post one way where he was just trying to deflect and I read it another way. I didn't see that but maybe I was wrong. Maybe you are right. 

But what if you are right? Does that stop the fact that Muslim women get treated like third class citizens? What if you were wrong? Then now we will just gloss over that fact and sweep it under the rug instead. Not our problem right?

And now you don't think I am trying to broaden the scope to include all marital rape. That's your right buddy. I don't choose to discriminate against any rapist be it marital or otherwise. I don't care who they are or who their daddy is or if they even go to church or not. 

BTW , I think Pixie can fight her own battles.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Yes.
> You would be stunned and amazed.
> 
> In 2011, my ex was referred to a large church in a small town close to ours.
> ...


I have no words to express my disgust to the men who abused you so horribly!! Hopefully there is a special place in Hell for them.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Shine said:


> "The inclusion of one is the exclusion of all others" The Rule of Statutory Construction.
> 
> Um... by the fashion that you have presented this you are specifically attacking Christianity.


Apparently you think so... that doesn't mean it's true. 

Have a wonderful day.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mreynolds said:


> Well I have to hand it to you. If anyone can get voice inflection understood in a thread it has to be you. So you read his post one way where he was just trying to deflect and I read it another way. I didn't see that but maybe I was wrong. Maybe you are right.
> 
> But what if you are right? Does that stop the fact that Muslim women get treated like third class citizens? What if you were wrong? Then now we will just gloss over that fact and sweep it under the rug instead. Not our problem right?
> 
> ...


Narshalla is allowed her opinion, whether it supports me or not.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Narshalla is allowed her opinion, whether it supports me or not.


You are correct. I just thought it was an unproductive post is all. Putting you on a pedestal while pretty much throwing me and FB under the bus. Her opinion is convinced of both of our wrongdoings. 

But it is still just _her_ opinion and no skin off my nose. It don't bother me but I will say something on my behalf always.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

The appropriate response to this article, if you actually empathize with women as human beings and you are a rational person, is...... Wow, this Larry Solomon guy is a real piece of trash.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

mreynolds said:


> Yes we understand each other completely. I understand_ firsthand_ about both rape and abuse victims. That was a long time ago and didn't even talk about it until a few years ago. But I did realize that its the power trip that gets them going and not any God. If I go to a church and the pastor tells me to do what the OP did I would probably end up with an assault charge. For those that do follow them they were already that way but just got another excuse to do it.
> 
> Its not acceptable in this society anymore. It once was you know. Other societies will follow suit as you cant keep people trapped in a situation they don't want to be in.


I am so sorry for what happened. I know it's not my fault, but no human being deserves what you have endured.

It's the "people" that keep me away from church, not God. I totally understand where you are coming from.

It is SIMPLY amazing what a person will accept 'as truth' when they are under the spell of abuse......
I was the strongest; strong headed, strong willed, deep sense of right and wrong, put up with ZERO bs......
A river is not formed in a day, but drip by drip, trickle by trickle , and before you know it? There's a river there.....and you can't even remember what the land looked like before it or how the hades it happened.
Abuse, is the same way when it happens over decades.....



Shine said:


> I do find it troubling that someone would try to slander the Christian faith as written in the Bible with some whacko's writings. It seems to me that the OP is using this whacko just because they can and that is terribly sad. No where is it written in the Bible that a man can do whatever they might want to with his wife but the OP wants to chip away at the Word with this nonsensical implication that "Christians do this". I find this extremely offensive and would have this thread closed as a baseless attack on the Christian Faith. The OP has made her opinion of the Christian faith known, I would ask that they not be given a soapbox to offend countless Christian members and the Christian guests that visit this website.


I am a God fearing Christ Believing/Follower, Believer of the Word;
I know the OP has no love for 'chrisitans'.
BUT
What I read was "this person is MISUSING God's Words to justify AND ENCOURAGE rape and abuse".



> If the OP wants to address Marital Rape without offending the Christian Faith then have at it, those that would rape a woman in what ever situation are wrong. I am just saying this is not just a Christian thing so it needs to be identified as such and leave the written Word out of it.


The article in question MISUSES the Word of God, the Name 'chrisitian' and that's how I read it.
Pixie and I are NOT knitting buddies, and we disagree on about 75% of all topics......but I gave her the benefit of the doubt that she was addressing the issue, and not slamming "God".
I think giving that benefit of the doubt, I was right.



Shine said:


> Yes, women have been treated in many different fashions throughout history. The Bible addresses the treatment of women with respect and love, nothing more. People want to imply what the statement "Wives should submit themselves to their Husbands..." means with many incorrect fallacies to support their agenda of hatred. This will never end and should be attacked every time it rears it's ugly head...
> 
> I know that the loon that is being referenced will get his due based on how God works, I would have it that God shows him the true meaning of how a wife should be treated.


That was my MUCH earlier (page 1) point.
God Commanded wives 1 sentence.
God Commanded husbands 1 PARAGRAPH.
If a man, loved his wife, as God Commands......it would be a wife's pleasure to 'submit' (look up the word in Greek, it doesn't mean doormat).


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Here's his website, apparently he has a large following.
> 
> http://biblicalgenderroles.com/


Please describe "large" - 100? 1,000,000? or are you just throwing that out there without really comprehending the actual volume. You do this a lot, you know...


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Rape makes you grin? Do you agree with the loon that forced marital sex is fine and dandy?



Really? Did you read the first sentence? "The _*thread*_ makes me grin."


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> Don't use your religion to condemn me, or insinuate I don't have a soul. I have no need to try to fill an self perceived inadequacy with faith of whatever sort. Apparently you do.
> 
> If you (collective you) have such faith why attack my lack of it? It would seem that your faith would sustain you.


What condemnation? Sound like the guilty flee, where no man pursueth.

And how can an atheist argue that man has a soul? If there is no God, there is no _Divine Spark_, aka soul. A person is simply a walking container for various chemicals, primarily water.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> What condemnation? Sound like the guilty flee, where no man pursueth.
> 
> And how can an atheist argue that man has a soul? If there is no God, there is no _Divine Spark_, aka soul. A person is simply a walking container for various chemicals, primarily water.


Prove that you have a soul, and then prove I don't.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Shine said:


> I could not care less about what you believe or do not believe. If there is something that I can learn from you, I will take that as my own and walk away better.


Then walk away. 
Just stop.




> It appears that you are wanting the change places with the "Attacker" and the "Attackee" - You continue to insult Christianity and then to see insults and innuendo where there are apparently none.
> 
> I see this as fitting in with your agenda to bash Christianity when ever, however and where ever, which you do quite often. Am I seeing a premise of being insecure here? Why is it important for you to continually bash one's loving relationship with their Creator with people that operate on the fringe? Why is it so important to you?
> 
> Here you have gone out of your way to find a whacko website, then investigate it and now to use it to fit your bashing agenda. It seems to fit a pattern.


Ok then, put her on ignore and walk away.
If you don't like this topic, walk away.......stop posting and posting and posting........
Just stop.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Jolly said:


> What condemnation? Sound like the guilty flee, where no man pursueth.
> 
> And how can an atheist argue that man has a soul? If there is no God, there is no _Divine Spark_, aka soul. A person is simply a walking container for various chemicals, primarily water.





Irish Pixie said:


> Prove that you have a soul, and then prove I don't.


We are all Created with a soul.
The End.

This has NOTHING to do with the OP.
Can we please stay on point?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

It might come as a surprise to many that there were no laws to protect women from marital rape since women were considered chattels. 

I learned this from firsthand experience and found it highly degrading when the officer suggested I go home, sort out my marital problems and act like a good wife and ask my estranged husband for forgiveness for trying to damage his reputation.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

I am so sorry WR.
I am not familiar w/ Canadian law......but that is the 'mindset' of a lot misinformed people.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

wr said:


> It might come as a surprise to many that there were no laws to protect women from marital rape since women were considered chattels.
> 
> I learned this from firsthand experience and found it highly degrading when the officer suggested I go home, sort out my marital problems and act like a good wife and ask my estranged husband for forgiveness for trying to damage his reputation.


I'm sorry this happened to you. 

Marital rape has been illegal in all 50 states since 1993. Has Canada since changed it's law?


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> Prove that you have a soul, and then prove I don't.


You're the one who is perturbed that I have insinuated you don't have a soul, which is twisting words like a man would make a rope. I believe everybody has a soul. And, as I said, I think hate shrinks souls. I think love helps expand them, or at least makes them whole.

But atheists insist there is no such thing as a soul. If you are an atheist and you do insist you have a soul, then I think you are the first I have spoken with that thinks so. 

Tell me, if God does not exist, from where comes your soul? Without God, Irish Pixie is simply nothing more than chemicals in a skin bag, propelled by DNA into certain shapes and certain replicative features, ending one day in a cessation of function.

But where did that Life come from in the first place? And why is Death so inexplainable?

Can I prove that you have a soul? I can give illustrations, but I can no sooner prove that you have a soul, that you can prove I do not. Of course, taken in the correct context, one cannot even prove reality. Or beauty.

I can only go by what I feel or what I can sense. There have been times in my life where I have seen unexplainable medical miracles. There have been times in my life when things happened, that shouldn't, couldn't possibly happened. And there have been times when I felt the Presence of God so strongly, I thought I could turn around and touch Him.

If you wish to laugh at that, go ahead. Poor, poor pitiful me, huh? Nah, on this one subject, I think I'm going to have the last laugh, but I doubt I do. Joy doesn't leave room for the petty thrill of "I told you so".

I'd even say I'd pray for you, but you would consider that beneath your dignity. Funny, many of the agnostics and atheists I've known would actually appreciate it.

Maybe even atheists could stand a little Jesus. It's good for the soul.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Jolly said:


> You're the one who is perturbed that I have insinuated you don't have a soul, which is twisting words like a man would make a rope. I believe everybody has a soul. And, as I said, I think hate shrinks souls. I think love helps expand them, or at least makes them whole.


There is nothing in Scripture that supports this.



> But atheists insist there is no such thing as a soul. If you are an atheist and you do insist you have a soul, then I think you are the first I have spoken with that thinks so.
> 
> Tell me, if God does not exist, from where comes your soul? Without God, Irish Pixie is simply nothing more than chemicals in a skin bag, propelled by DNA into certain shapes and certain replicative features, ending one day in a cessation of function.


Start a new thread. Do not derail this thread.



> But where did that Life come from in the first place? And why is Death so inexplainable?
> 
> Can I prove that you have a soul? I can give illustrations, but I can no sooner prove that you have a soul, that you can prove I do not. Of course, taken in the correct context, one cannot even prove reality. Or beauty.
> 
> ...


What you are saying is NOT what Jesus would say; and if you claim to be His, act like it. 
This is rude, condesending, and NO WONDER she doesn't like christians or christianianty..........




> Maybe even atheists could stand a little Jesus. It's good for the soul.


This is so insulting.
I am a God Fearing Believer, and I find this horrifyingly insulting.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm sorry this happened to you.
> 
> 
> 
> Marital rape has been illegal in all 50 states since 1993. Has Canada since changed it's law?



Canada has since changed their laws but that doesn't change the reality for those raped by spouses in the '80's. 

In working as a volunteer with victims of domestic abuse, spousal rape is still considered very difficult to convict so charges are not often laid unless a legal separation is in place.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

But that is not what the OP is about......
So please, feel free to start a new thread on 'what christians are supposed to do" and leave this thread alone....
Start a new thread and I will answer your question

THIS is the OP

*Marital rape a myth?* 
No one actually believes that a wife/partner can't say no to sex, right? This can't a commonly held belief. Can it? 

From the link: "But one piece of advice given last week by Biblical Gender Roles writer Larry Solomon wasn't just antiquated, but also highly offensive and damaging: Solomon asserted that husbands "should not tolerate" their wives' refusal to have sex, essentially endorsing marital rape by doing so, Raw Story reported Monday."

http://www.mic.com/articles/127405/c...t=inf_10_285_2

More from the same loon:

"Christian Husbands &#8211; let me be crystal clear here. The situation I am addressing in this post is not your wife occasionally turning you down for sex (even with a bad attitude, as opposed to for health or other legitimate reasons). What I am addressing here is the wife who consistently and routinely denies her husband sexually simply because she does not need sex as much or she thinks she should not have to do it except when she is in the mood or she thinks her husband should have to earn sex with her by &#8220;putting her in the mood&#8221; by doing various things she expects or likes."

http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/...exual-refusal/


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> But that is not what the OP is about......
> So please, feel free to start a new thread on 'what christians are supposed to do" and leave this thread alone....
> Start a new thread and I will answer your question
> 
> ...


Sorry, haven't read all the links, but I will pull this out from the last one you list:

I have not, nor would I EVER advocate for a husband to force himself physically upon his wife or to physically abuse her in any fashion. The issue being discussed is how a husband can confront a wife who chronically or willfully denies his sexual rights in marriage without just cause(be it legitimate health or mental conditions). He has the right, both under Biblical law, as well as under American law, to reason with his with his wife and try to convince her to willingly(even if grudgingly) yield herself to him, and thereby fulfilling one her most important duties in Christian marriage.

The above quoted, was also red in the article, for extra emphasis.

Now, does that constitute marital rape?


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Jolly said:


> Sorry, haven't read all the links, but I will pull this out from the last one you list:
> 
> I have not, nor would I EVER advocate for a husband to force himself physically upon his wife or to physically abuse her in any fashion. The issue being discussed is *(1) how a husband can confront a wife *who chronically or willfully denies *(2) his sexual rights in marriage *without just cause(be it legitimate health or mental conditions). *(3)He has the right, both under Biblical law, as well as under American law, to reason with his with his wife and try to convince her to willingly(even if grudgingly) yield herself to him, and thereby fulfilling one her most important duties in Christian marriage.*
> 
> ...


*1. Confront his wife.*
A healthy marriage, that is a partnership, each person giving 100%, communication lines are WIDE open between the two, and both are actively participating in communication..............there is no need to "confront".
Confrontation means that the break down in the marriage happened LONG before this show down.

What if he "confronts her" because he's not getting 'his needs met' and she says "well, you are not loving me as God Commanded".....then she can confront him with his short comings?
Funny, this article mentions NOTHING about a husband/wife team.
It's all about how a husband can force his wife, thru many different ways, to give him sex.
*
2. HIS sexual rights?* What? No......
His wife is not his property. We stopped doing that a long time ago.
What about HER sexual rights? Do his trump hers?
Absolutely not.
Again, this loon is grooming men on how to manipulate Scripture to abuse women, namely their wives.
Good chances are, if the men were loving their wives as Scripture Commands, there would not be this issue.

*3. *I would never, ever, want to have sex w/ someone I had to beg, convince, manipulate, or abuse to get it. CLEARLY there is something VERY wrong in the marriage.

Sometimes a wife refuses sex because her husband abuses her, violates her, cheats on her, treats her like a piece of meat, talks to her like she is a who ree, has sick fetishes, is addicted to porn...........
None of the above are acceptable to God and none of these are on the list Commanded by God on how to treat your wife.


Yes, when a husband, forces his wife either mentally or physically to have sex with him, it is rape. The End.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

If a woman (person) says no, it's rape. If he "guilts" her into, shames her into, or forces her into it via her religion, it's still rape.


What is Rape?

Definition of Rape. The exact definition of "rape" differs from state-to-state within the U.S. and by country internationally. In the US, it is often called "criminal sexual conduct in the first degree". Generally, rape is defined as sexual contact or penetration achieved:

without consent, or
with use of physical force, coercion, deception, threat, and/or
when the victim is:
mentally incapacitated or impaired,
physically impaired (due to voluntary or involuntary alcohol or drug consumption)
asleep or unconscious.

One of the most critical issues regarding rape is consent. Sexual activity should not take place unless both parties have freely given consent, and consent is understood by both parties.

silence does not mean consent.


if consent is given under duress (physical or emotional threats), then it is not given freely or willingly and sex with a person consenting under duress is rape


if someone is impaired due to alcohol or drugs, that person is deemed incapable of consenting and sex with that person is rape (even if the impaired person says "yes")

From: http://www.pandys.org/whatisrape.html


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> *1. Confront his wife.*
> A healthy marriage, that is a partnership, each person giving 100%, communication lines are WIDE open between the two, and both are actively participating in communication..............there is no need to "confront".
> Confrontation means that the break down in the marriage happened LONG before this show down.
> 
> ...


The passage in red was Solomon's attempt to spin what he had originally said, "If a husband decides to have sex with his wife against her will, he should, Solomon advised, focus his eyes "on her body, not her face" and "concentrate 100% on the physical side." He added that, "Sometimes we have to work around the sinful behavior of our wives and this will be one of those times." and "By stating that consent is not required of married women, Solomon effectively argues that marital rape is permissible. It's a stance he's taken before, as Raw Story notes: In May, he explicitly wrote "*there is no such thing as marital rape*."


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

I've been married for 35 years. And if Jesus doesn't come back first, they'll lay me in ground on the ridge by the little country church down the road. I'll have plenty of company, since I'll be the fifth generation laid to rest there, all of us with our wives...Well, hopefully not with my wife, it would break my heart if she died before me.

You know something? None of my line has divorced. Going back several generations, none of my wife's family has divorced, either. Not to say it won't happen, nobody or no family is perfect. But it helps that both families are old-time, fundamentally Biblically grounded.

In the first place, you don't do something as serious as picking a mate and getting married on the whim of a moment. You date. You get to know each other. You make sure that you know that you will be a team, that you lean into the harness equally, even though your roles are different. You discuss money. You discuss children. You discuss your spiritual life and who has to make accommodations (if any). And you pull out the Bible, read those scriptures and have a firm understanding just how things will be. 

Yes, men and women look at sex differently. But sex should be a joy in a marriage, never a weapon. Intimacy should make a couple stronger, not give one or the other something to complain about. And while no means no, it's been my experience there is more than one level of no and more than one reason for it. Good couples work out the problems behind the no. And yep, sometimes a wife participates in sex, even when she may not want it or feel like it...Funny what you will do for someone you love, isn't it? Both of us have certainly done things for the other that we really didn't want to do, but we did it because the other marriage partner needed it.

Isn't that what the Bible says?

Go back and read the excerpt from Ephesians 5 with an open mind:

_20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;

21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:

30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband._


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

So a little marital rape is fine and dandy, as long as you're "doing it with love because you need it"? 

As Laura said, I would never want to have sex with someone that I had to force into it. That's not love, it's control.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> So a little marital rape is fine and dandy, as long as you're "doing it with love because you need it"?
> 
> As Laura said, I would never want to have sex with someone that I had to force into it. That's not love, it's control.


Never had sex with your husband, when you really didn't feel like it?


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> So a little marital rape is fine and dandy, as long as you're "doing it with love because you need it"?
> 
> As Laura said, I would never want to have sex with someone that I had to force into it. That's not love, it's control.


I don't actually think that's what Jolly is advocating here.

Have I agreed to sex with my husband when I wasn't really in the mood, tired, cranky, whatever? Sure. Has he agreed to sex with me when he wasn't really in the mood, tired, cranky, whatever? Sure. We've both agreed to intimacy when we weren't really up for it because we've known that the other partner needs it in that particular moment. Because sometimes you do something you don't particularly want to do in that moment because it fulfills a need for your partner at that moment. I think that was the point Jolly was trying to make. I don't think he was advocating forcing or coercing the other partner. If I misconstrued his point, I'm sure he'll correct me.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

SLFarmMI said:


> I don't actually think that's what Jolly is advocating here.
> 
> Have I agreed to sex with my husband when I wasn't really in the mood, tired, cranky, whatever? Sure. Has he agreed to sex with me when he wasn't really in the mood, tired, cranky, whatever? Sure. We've both agreed to intimacy when we weren't really up for it because we've known that the other partner needs it in that particular moment. Because sometimes you do something you don't particularly want to do in that moment because it fulfills a need for your partner at that moment. I think that was the point Jolly was trying to make. I don't think he was advocating forcing or coercing the other partner. If I misconstrued his point, I'm sure he'll correct me.


No correction needed.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> *
> 2. HIS sexual rights?* What? No......
> His wife is not his property. We stopped doing that a long time ago.
> What about HER sexual rights? Do his trump hers?
> ...


I think what the Bible actually does say is that the body of the wife isn't just hers, it's her husbands..AND the body of the husband isn't just his, it's his wife's also and speaks about not defrauding one another of that. This "his sexual rights" might just be addressing half of it, but both husband and wife do have rights to one another's bodies.

Refusing sexual contact as a matter of habit would be an occasion for some serious sit down, get to the root of the matter kind of talks... but forceful rape would be a violation of loving one's spouse as their own flesh.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> Never had sex with your husband, when you really didn't feel like it?


No, I haven't. And he would never even think of coercing me into it. I would never do that to him either. 

We don't control each other...


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> No, I haven't. And he would never even think of coercing me into it. I would never do that to him either.
> 
> We don't control each other...


I have a hard time believing that. I think love drives us (drive may be too strong of a word) to make concessions and accommodations in a successful marriage.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> The passage in red was Solomon's attempt to spin what he had originally said, "If a husband decides to have sex with his wife against her will, he should, Solomon advised, focus his eyes "on her body, not her face" and "concentrate 100% on the physical side." He added that, "Sometimes we have to work around the sinful behavior of our wives and this will be one of those times." and "By stating that consent is not required of married women, Solomon effectively argues that marital rape is permissible. It's a stance he's taken before, as Raw Story notes: In May, he explicitly wrote "*there is no such thing as marital rape*."


This guy is a pig, and someone should lock him up for accessory to rape.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

> Judge not, lest ye be Judged.
> Jesus said......


Sorry, not going to let that one go...

Lot of people love to cherry-pick that verse, but they are wrong in doing so. Read Matthew 6. Read who Jesus is talking to and read who He is talking about. We are not to judge in the manner of the Pharisees. 

He speaks of judging not, but immediately in the same chapter speaks of obeying God and how hard it is to maintain a strait way though a narrow gate. To do that require daily judging on the part of the committed Christian.

And Paul speaks of Truth and the divisive nature of lies:

_That we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the headâChristâfrom whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. (Ephesians 4:14â16) _

Christians judge every day. Jesus wants us to judge in love, to judge in righteousness, but never in hypocricy.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Woolieface said:


> I think what the Bible actually does say is that the body of the wife isn't just hers, it's her husbands..AND the body of the husband isn't just his, it's his wife's also and speaks about not defrauding one another of that. This "his sexual rights" might just be addressing half of it, but both husband and wife do have rights to one another's bodies.
> 
> Refusing sexual contact as a matter of habit would be an occasion for some serious sit down, get to the root of the matter kind of talks... but forceful rape would be a violation of loving one's spouse as their own flesh.



I have done, extensive, intense, deep study of Ephesians 5.
I learned the Greek. I learned the history of the time. I learned the Hebrew.
It's deeper than what you read in your NIV.

You don't understand how badly I tried to be "the biblical wife" and how badly he abused and used that against me......
You don't understand; I walked a dark mile in the shadow of misrepresented manipulated Scriptures spewed by wolves......

As far as 'sex' when you don't feel like it........

If my spouse is not in the mood, I most certainly don't want to be intimate w/ someone who's just going thru the motions.
That's just sex.

Does no one make love?

Where you speak love into each other all day long; good morning, thank you, I appreciate you, you're amazing, I am so blessed to have you in my life, that's beautiful, it was delicious......etc.......
Holding hands, walking close, sitting close......just for the sake of being close (not so you can grope) 
Does no one look into each others eyes, smile?
All of these things are what sets the stage for making love......sharing our deepest connection; sharing literally, our entire being.

Animals have sex.
Are there no humans left that make love?


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Jolly said:


> Sorry, not going to let that one go...
> 
> Lot of people love to cherry-pick that verse, but they are wrong in doing so. Read Matthew 6. Read who Jesus is talking to and read who He is talking about. We are not to judge in the manner of the Pharisees.
> 
> ...


JUDGE in this passage; (Matthew 7) in the Greek, which is what the NT was written in means "condemnation".
Condemnation that only Jesus is permitted: That means ONLY Jesus can say "yes, you are mine and going to heaven, no you are not mine and going to hell".
Condemnation that only Jesus is permitted: That means ONLY Jesus can say "Yes, Laura loves Me and follows Me" or "No Laura does not love Me or follow Me"

Study your Greek.

JUDGE in the passage that tells us to "make right judgements"(Phillippians) means TO DISCERN. 
"Someone threw a baby out the car window, and there is an alligator coming towards the baby" YOU make the judgment call that this baby is in danger and you better save it.
Discern.

Study, your Greek before you try to take me to task.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> I have a hard time believing that. I think love drives us (drive may be too strong of a word) to make concessions and accommodations in a successful marriage.


Think what you want if makes it easier to justify your actions.

We've been married 33 years next week, it wasn't always perfect but we have always loved each other enough to make it work.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Think what you want if makes it easier to justify your actions.
> 
> We've been married 33 years next week, it wasn't always perfect but we have always loved each other enough to make it work.


Congratulations. 
You two are a rare shining gem in this dark disposable world.
I raised my coffee cup and toast you both!


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> JUDGE in this passage; (Matthew 7) in the Greek, which is what the NT was written in means "condemnation".
> Condemnation that only Jesus is permitted: That means ONLY Jesus can say "yes, you are mine and going to heaven, no you are not mine and going to hell".
> Condemnation that only Jesus is permitted: That means ONLY Jesus can say "Yes, Laura loves Me and follows Me" or "No Laura does not love Me or follow Me"
> 
> ...


Peace be with you.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> You're the one who is perturbed that I have insinuated you don't have a soul, which is twisting words like a man would make a rope. I believe everybody has a soul. And, as I said, I think hate shrinks souls. I think love helps expand them, or at least makes them whole.
> 
> But atheists insist there is no such thing as a soul. If you are an atheist and you do insist you have a soul, then I think you are the first I have spoken with that thinks so.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry that you have such little faith that you have to denigrate my lack of it.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Yea that's love right there. Whining and petitioning until the woman gives in and does her duty. How about this... As long as everyone here understands married women can say no until the last star in this universe dies and infinitely beyond that if she chooses, I'm just going to step on out of this conversation.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Ok, after reading this thread finally all the way through, I find it interesting to say the least. I don't quite understand the whole concept of marital rape.... Never once in my married life have I had any sexual encounter with any of my three wives that was "forced". I have always been met with eager anticipation so it's very difficult to comprehend the concept. Why would any woman marry a man they didn't want to have sex with? :shrug:


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, after reading this thread finally all the way through, I find it interesting to say the least. I don't quite understand the whole concept of marital rape.... Never once in my married life have I had any sexual encounter with any of my three wives that was "forced". I have always been met with eager anticipation so it's very difficult to comprehend the concept. Why would any woman marry a man they didn't want to have sex with? :shrug:


I gave you one example in this thread: health insurance.

Women marry a man for all sorts of reasons. Men marry women for all sorts of reasons. And I've seen both use sex as a marital weapon.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wiscto said:


> Yea that's love right there. Whining and petitioning until the woman gives in and does her duty. How about this... As long as everyone here understands married women can say no until the last star in this universe dies and infinitely beyond that if she chooses, I'm just going to step on out of this conversation.


Again, you have a firm grasp of the superficial.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, after reading this thread finally all the way through, I find it interesting to say the least. I don't quite understand the whole concept of marital rape.... Never once in my married life have I had any sexual encounter with any of my three wives that was "forced". I have always been met with eager anticipation so it's very difficult to comprehend the concept. Why would any woman marry a man they didn't want to have sex with? :shrug:


I have no clue. 

It could be a "I shaved my legs for this?" type of thing, a lack of effort on his part? I'd have no idea about that...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, after reading this thread finally all the way through, I find it interesting to say the least. I don't quite understand the whole concept of marital rape.... Never once in my married life have I had any sexual encounter with any of my three wives that was "forced". I have always been met with eager anticipation so it's very difficult to comprehend the concept. Why would any woman marry a man they didn't want to have sex with? :shrug:



Well........we all can't be like you and Rock Hudson..........:bow:

OK, maybe that wasn't the best choice to use.
:teehee::lookout:


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, after reading this thread finally all the way through, I find it interesting to say the least. I don't quite understand the whole concept of marital rape.... Never once in my married life have I had any sexual encounter with any of my three wives that was "forced". I have always been met with eager anticipation so it's very difficult to comprehend the concept. *Why would any woman marry a man they didn't want to have sex with? :shrug: *


THAT is a great question.

She doesn't marry a man she doesn't want to have sex with.
In some cases, that man, reveals his true self.
He beats her, calls her worthless, whor ree, spits on her, etc.

Maybe he's more sinister......something no one else can see.
His cutting comments, he treats her like some inferior idiot that is only on this earth to cook him dinner and give him sex on command.
He gropes her like a sex crazed lunatic, his idea of romance is "ya wana do it, roll over here", then as soon as he's done, he's snoring........."
She feels like a piece of meat. Dirty, cheap, etc.

I'd guess most women don't walk into a marriage and say "ewwww I don't want to have sex w/ him".
Abuse (physical, mental, emotional, finanacial, sexual, etc) wears a woman's soul thin.
Her dignity, her safety, her security, her self respect, is gone.
Her whole life is out of control; a real scary place to be
All she has left, that she has SOME control over? Her own body.......
When she is mentally, emotionally, financially, abused; her mind is a wreck, but her body is in tact.......

Abuse does messed up things to the human mind.

Women who have surpressed childhood violation could find themselves dealing with that trauma after they get married; and they fear telling their spouse....

Women who are on certain medications.

Just a few reasons.......


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I have done, extensive, intense, deep study of Ephesians 5.
> I learned the Greek. I learned the history of the time. I learned the Hebrew.
> It's deeper than what you read in your NIV.
> 
> ...


I don't, personally, subscribe to the NIV...and I do use original language references.

Abuse isn't in the idea of submitting to one another, but you know that by what you're saying here. I was was expounding on the proper biblical interpretation of rights to one another's bodies...not the abuse of them or the scriptures speaking about it.

Defrauding one another of those rights goes beyond an occasional "I don't feel like it"...it's a habitual issue, and if we turn it around and think about a woman who's husband never wants to touch her, I think we can agree that she is going to feel neglected and unloved after a while.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Jolly said:


> Again, you have a firm grasp of the superficial.


You can call it superficial if you want. Whether or not it is depends on whether or not your bible is real, whether or not there really is something out there that gives a flying rats tail whether or not your marriage dies, whether or not that super being thinks your extremely closed minded and subjective view of human relationships is divine. 

Me? If it ever gets to the point where my wife just doesn't want me, I'm not going to ask her to just lay there and let me give her memories of uncomfortable nights, you know, because I'm the man and it just isn't fair (wah wah wah). No more than I would ask myself to take one for the team, pop a little blue pill, and let a woman I'm not remotely interested in rock me like hurricane.

Talk about it? Yea. Work on it? Yea. Complain that I'm a man and I view sex differently, so she should do her part for the marriage by laying there and taking it like a champ? If that's God, God was a man who didn't understand women, didn't really care to because he was a selfish dude....and he sounds like kind of a deluded wanker to me. Maybe I'm just this way because I talk to the ladies and actually understand how they feel, but I don't think I could even enjoy that enough for it to even work.

Now don't get all offended and call the political correctness police on me.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

wiscto said:


> You can call it superficial if you want. Whether or not it is depends on whether or not your bible is real, whether or not there really is something out there that gives a flying rats tail whether or not your marriage dies, whether or not that super being thinks your extremely closed minded and subjective view of human relationships is divine.
> 
> Me? If it ever gets to the point where my wife just doesn't want me, I'm not going to ask her to just lay there and let me give her memories of uncomfortable nights, you know, because I'm the man and it just isn't fair (wah wah wah). No more than I would ask myself to take one for the team, pop a little blue pill, and let a woman I'm not remotely interested in rock me like hurricane.
> 
> ...


Excellent, real world post.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> THAT is a great question.
> 
> She doesn't marry a man she doesn't want to have sex with.
> In some cases, that man, reveals his true self.
> ...


Another excellent post.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wiscto said:


> You can call it superficial if you want. Whether or not it is depends on whether or not your bible is real, whether or not there really is something out there that gives a flying rats tail whether or not your marriage dies, whether or not that super being thinks your extremely closed minded and subjective view of human relationships is divine.
> 
> Me? If it ever gets to the point where my wife just doesn't want me, I'm not going to ask her to just lay there and let me give her memories of uncomfortable nights, you know, because I'm the man and it just isn't fair (wah wah wah). No more than I would ask myself to take one for the team, pop a little blue pill, and let a woman I'm not remotely interested in rock me like hurricane.
> 
> ...


I'm not offended, I considered the source.

There's knowledge, and then there's wisdom. I think you have a lot of knowledge. With time, will come wisdom.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, after reading this thread finally all the way through, I find it interesting to say the least. I don't quite understand the whole concept of marital rape.... Never once in my married life have I had any sexual encounter with any of my three wives that was "forced". I have always been met with eager anticipation so it's very difficult to comprehend the concept. Why would any woman marry a man they didn't want to have sex with? :shrug:


The concept is simple. It is my body and if I say I don't feel like having sex and say no then that ring on your finger and your desires does not give you the right to violate my body or go against MY wishes. Sometimes you just don't feel like having sex today or this week or this month. Sometimes you do. Sometimes there is a lot more going on in the marriage which makes the idea of having intimate relations seem like a joke. If you treat your partner like dirt then why would they want to please you (this applies to men and women). And then there is the problem that many men still think they own their wives. Sorry but no.

Women and men often marry and then find out they got a pig in a poke. Couples divorce all the time but also often stay together for the children and/or financial reasons but this does not mean they need to have an intimate life. And certainly not one forced upon either party.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Do you have a problem with me liking Laura in Zone 10's post? To borrow her phrase, we aren't knitting buddies, but in on this topic she just makes sense.

Care to share why you decided to post something snide? I'm sure that you've indicated that it's just not your style.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Irish Pixie said:


> Do you have a problem with me liking Laura in Zone 10's post? To borrow her phrase, we aren't knitting buddies, but in on this topic she just makes sense.
> 
> Care to share why you decided to post something snide? I'm sure that you've indicated that it's just not your style.


No, it's somewhat unlike you to post post two lengthy quotes in a row. You tend to "like" post, but I find you rarely re-quoite unless making a point.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Jolly said:


> No, it's somewhat unlike you to post post two lengthy quotes in a row. You tend to "like" post, but I find you rarely re-quoite unless making a point.


I do when they are excellent, on the money posts.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

We'll, there is no sense posting on this thread when posters get a free pass and others are censored for doing similar thing that others are doing to start the thread. This is turning into a hateful site. 
Correction: a site that permits open Christian bashing.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Shine said:


> We'll, there is no sense posting on this thread when posters get a free pass and others are censored for doing similar thing that others are doing to start the thread. This is turning into a hateful site.
> Correction: a site that permits open Christian bashing.


I am a Believer, and Follower of Jesus Christ.
No one has bashed me, or my Faith.......
However, those who call themselves christian have questioned my faith....tried to take me to Scriptural task, mocked, and belittled.

Weird huh?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Have it as you wish. I see the pattern clearly. Enjoy your newly found associates. You are known by your fruit...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Shine said:


> We'll, there is no sense posting on this thread when posters get a free pass and others are censored for doing similar thing that others are doing to start the thread. This is turning into a hateful site.
> Correction: a site that permits open Christian bashing.


Don't play the victim card.
Anyone who was "censored" brought it on themselves.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Shine said:


> Have it as you wish. I see the pattern clearly. Enjoy your newly found associates. You are known by your fruit...


The Pharisee's were known for their love too.........


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

Woolieface said:


> I think what the Bible actually does say is that the body of the wife isn't just hers, it's her husbands..AND the body of the husband isn't just his, it's his wife's also and speaks about not defrauding one another of that. This "his sexual rights" might just be addressing half of it, but both husband and wife do have rights to one another's bodies.
> 
> Refusing sexual contact as a matter of habit would be an occasion for some serious sit down, get to the root of the matter kind of talks... but forceful rape would be a violation of loving one's spouse as their own flesh.


Celibacy is a lifestyle that some of us married folk have a very hard time adjusting to.



My wife did her best to avoid any conversation of this topic for a long time. After 34 years we have never gotten to the 'root of the matter'.

Outside of how she hates sex, she thinks it is icky. She can force herself to 'go along with it', and the result is that it hurts her. She is only willing to 'try' once every second year or so.

There was a time, when we were courting and soon after our wedding, when she acted like she enjoyed sex. Once you could no longer hear the wedding bells however, it changed.

Thankfully God answered my prayers, though not how I envisioned them being answered. After 33 years of marriage, I had prostate cancer last year and the surgeon had to remove the nerve-bundle, now my member no longer functions and my wife has herself a 'perfect husband'.


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

I've read this thread and the different bickering. I think the issue comes down to what people call love and what is true love...

True love:


> Not one couple in a century has that chance, no matter what the storybooks say.


 Princess Bride.

It shouldn't be rare but I fear few understand what it is, and there lies the problem. That is as much as I'm going to say.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

It won't let me see the last page?????


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> It won't let me see the last page?????



It won't let me either. Maybe a glitch?


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

That's odd, I can see it


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I can see it now.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I am a Believer, and Follower of Jesus Christ.
> No one has bashed me, or my Faith.......
> However, those who call themselves christian have questioned my faith....tried to take me to Scriptural task, mocked, and belittled.
> 
> Weird huh?


Nah, that's happened, and it happens a lot. Calling out the Christian faith in general by way of thread titles or just "sly" jabs is pretty common here. It's not specifically targeted to individuals normally because that wouldn't be that sly. The problem is that standing up and saying something in defense of one's faith gets posts deleted and threads shut down eventually. Since I've never told anyone they should shut up about their dislike of the Christian faith, I just think it's fair to allow a Christian to express themselves as freely....but there is definitely a lack of balance on that note.

Believers have different understandings of the scriptures too... sometimes it's honest differences (Christians are a work in progress), sometimes it's a little more about personal biases, but as believers there's nothing wrong with choosing peace over division as long as we all know who our savior is.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Jolly said:


> I'm not offended, I considered the source.
> 
> There's knowledge, and then there's wisdom. I think you have a lot of knowledge. With time, will come wisdom.


Real life has taught me that the average person is self centered and will choose something that validates their opinions and presumptions in the face of alternate points of view, usually something arbitrary that doesn't require proof. For you that appears to be time, rather than quality and wealth of experience. But would a wise person presume that their experience has made them wiser simply because they've had more time to experience? Probably not.

Do I think some women are willing to take one for the team? Yea. Actually. I'm sure some do, and I'm sure those women just have a different rationale. It's circumstantial. It's individual. And here's this Larry Solomon guy telling Christians that it should be that way for everyone, because that's what being a good Christian means. I think that's insane. 

But I consider the source...


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

I couldn't read at the links but I gleaned enough from what was quoted here by other posters to get an idea of what this Solomon character is all about. I think he is a professional misogynist who sexually objectifies and discriminates against women and uses a religion as a crutch or scapegoat to justify misogyny and sexual coercion.

Note that I say "a religion" rather than naming Christianity specifically because I think it wouldn't make any difference whatever religion he adheres to, or even if he followed no religion at all. All misogynists have excuses of one kind or another to justify being the way they are and religion is just the personal excuse that Solomon uses.

I certainly don't think he should be counselling other men about their marital difficulties.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

By the way. Nobody, including myself, said anything about Larry Soloman that hasn't reached unacceptable levels when some of y'all like to talk about Barrack Obama. So I don't want to hear the, "Some people get away with it..." crap. "Turning into" a hateful site? No, people are just expressing hate for things you respect now, instead of it being a 24 hour a day Sean Hannity puppet show.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

wiscto said:


> By the way. Nobody, including myself, said anything about Larry Soloman that hasn't reached unacceptable levels when some of y'all like to talk about Barrack Obama. So I don't want to hear the, "Some people get away with it..." crap. "Turning into" a hateful site? No, people are just expressing hate for things you respect now, instead of it being a 24 hour a day Sean Hannity puppet show.


I agree with what you say except the part about people respecting something you hate. If you mean they respect the martial rape them I must admit to not seeing that at all. Where did you see that at?


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

I am not going to play in this thread anymore. From the first post it was an ad hominem attack on Christians. I would ask the mods to delete it and end this.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

mreynolds said:


> I agree with what you say except the part about people respecting something you hate. If you mean they respect the martial rape them I must admit to not seeing that at all. Where did you see that at?


That was more of a general statement, although they did spin the OP into an attack on Christianity. Even if it is Irish Pixie's opinion, it's no worse than the things they do around here. They regularly poke fun at the intelligence of Liberals and Democrats, throwing everyone who doesn't see the world their way into those categories. They regularly insinuate that the president is a traitor, and none of their posts get deleted. They regularly call Hillary Clinton names and talk about her with brutal disdain, which I primarily agree with her on even though I wouldn't use the words they use. Those posts aren't deleted. But for some reason they believe this Larry Solomon guy was out of bounds. It's hypocrisy at its worst.


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

Shine said:


> I am not going to play in this thread anymore. From the first post it was an ad hominem attack on Christians. I would ask the mods to delete it and end this.


I have a slightly different take on it and I think possibly there could be others with different takes on it too. I agree it was an attack but I saw it as an attack on the man for what he is advocating, not on the religion he claims for himself. 

This particular man (in my view point) is a con man with devious and unscrupulous motives and he uses a religion as his scapegoat to justify his motives. The man is actually something of a predator of both men and women. Through the guise of marital counselling he is profiting financially while making subtle attempts to both dupe and enable other potential sexual predators and misogynists like himself to use religion as the same scapegoat that he uses. In his case he claims Christianity as his religion because he can take advantage and twist the purer intent and meanings of some of the Christian scriptures to suit his own predatory purposes. Consequently, to people who don't see through his ruse (which apparently a lot of people are not seeing or refusing to see through his ruse) but who disagree with what he promotes he gives a bad name to the religion he claims.

I think that is sad. I'm not a Christian but I don't like to see con men (whether or not they are sexual abusers) abusing Christianity or any other religion as their means of preying upon people. It's like a slap in the face to God.

I don't think the thread should be deleted. I think the topic about this man's motives and ill-doing deserves further examination. This is a good example of how a sexually abusive confidence man can profit from and prey upon not only other men and women but is able to do it by abusing a very popular western religion as well and I think it's worthy of discussing how he is able to get away with it. Personally I think he gets away with it because it's so popular and so many people who follow the same religion he claims simply don't recognize or are willing to overlook or turn a blind eye to the harm he is doing because they want to trust in and defend their Christian religion. If he was advocating a different religion, anything other than Christianity, but using the same excuses and similar scriptures, then more Christian people would see through his ruse and they wouldn't think kindly of his abuse.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

In a marital situation, and this is just my opinion, the cause of all problems is selfishness. If a man put his wife above all other desires and the wife does the same with her husband most problems disappear. A wife will not refuse her husband, but a husband will respect the wife's wishes. 

why is the husband always the bad guy? what happens if the wife wants to have sex but the husband refuses. can she force herself on him? physiology does not have to be willful. some things work on autopilot.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I don't hate christians, I don't hate christianity, I don't hate islam, or any other religion. Most of my family and friends are christians. It's the hypocrisy of christian extremists that annoys me. 

*My post was to point out what I've been saying for months- some christians cherry pick the bible (or the quran) to make it say anything they want. The article I linked pointed out my opinion perfectly. It also highlighted rape which is one of my hot button topics. The loon Solomon was using scripture to control women, and to tell men that god says it's a fine thing to do. I don't think that is something that most christians believe yet this loon has a following.
*
Someone said they'd say something about Irish people being drunks, fighting, whatever... fine. Some Irish people are all that and more, but not *all* of them are. It's wrong to lump all of whatever group in with the extremists of that group. And that is my point, that and Solomon is a rapist loon.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

I STILL cannot see past post 120.

I updated my flash player.
I shut down all my tabs, restarted my computer.
I updated my firefox, shut everything down, restarted my computer.

I have waited over 24 hours.

I STILL cannot see past post 120 (page 6)
I can SEE there IS a page 7, but when I click on it 3 different ways, it will not take me there.......


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> I don't hate christians, I don't hate christianity, I don't hate islam, or any other religion. Most of my family and friends are christians. It's the hypocrisy of christian extremists that annoys me.
> 
> My post was to point out what I've been saying for months- _some_ christians cherry pick the bible (or the quran) to make it say anything they want. The article I linked pointed out my opinion perfectly. It also highlighted rape which is one of my hot button topics. The loon Solomon was using scripture to control women, and to tell men that god says it's a fine thing to do. I don't think that is something that most christians believe yet this loon has a following.
> 
> Someone said they'd say something about Irish people being drunks, fighting, whatever... fine. Some Irish people are all that and more, but not *all* of them are. It's wrong to lump all of whatever group in with the extremists of that group. And that is my point, that and Solomon is a rapist loon.


Someone did not say that they would say something about the Irish people, someone used that to compare to your original post. In that actual post they stated that they would not do that. Yes, I will grant you that the person you chose as your poster child is a bad person if he actually believes that people should force themselves upon others but I would ask, is he the only loon out there that believes he deserves this kind of thing? You specifically chose a person who claims to be a Christian and then stopped anyone from increasing the scope to include other religions. Why?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I STILL cannot see past post 120.
> 
> I updated my flash player.
> I shut down all my tabs, restarted my computer.
> ...



Are you using a PC, iPad, iPhone, android or something else?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Shine said:


> Someone did not say that they would say something about the Irish people, someone used that to compare to your original post. In that actual post they stated that they would not do that. Yes, I will grant you that the person you chose as your poster child is a bad person if he actually believes that people should force themselves upon others but I would ask, is he the only loon out there that believes he deserves this kind of thing? You specifically chose a person who claims to be a Christian and then stopped anyone from increasing the scope to include other religions. Why?


I don't have to explain what or why I post to you or anyone else, but if you read the post you responded to it explains why. I'll even go in and bold it for you.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Shine said:


> Someone did not say that they would say something about the Irish people, someone used that to compare to your original post. In that actual post they stated that they would not do that. Yes, I will grant you that the person you chose as your poster child is a bad person if he actually believes that people should force themselves upon others but I would ask, is he the only loon out there that believes he deserves this kind of thing? You specifically chose a person who claims to be a Christian and then stopped anyone from increasing the scope to include other religions. Why?


In my opinion, anyone who advocates taking away someone's right to say no is a bad person and to do so in the name of any religion only serves to drag that faith through the mud and that applies to any an all faiths. 

I may not be Christian but that also doesn't mean that I don't admire some wonderful Christians within my community nor does it mean I dislike all Christians because I have no respect the neighbor who uses the bible to justify his wife's black eyes and broken bones.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

wiscto said:


> That was more of a general statement, although they did spin the OP into an attack on Christianity. Even if it is Irish Pixie's opinion, it's no worse than the things they do around here. They regularly poke fun at the intelligence of Liberals and Democrats, throwing everyone who doesn't see the world their way into those categories. They regularly insinuate that the president is a traitor, and none of their posts get deleted. They regularly call Hillary Clinton names and talk about her with brutal disdain, which I primarily agree with her on even though I wouldn't use the words they use. Those posts aren't deleted. But for some reason they believe this Larry Solomon guy was out of bounds. It's hypocrisy at its worst.


I don't know what site you've been reading, but lemme help you out.
She most certainly DOES spin a thread to attack Christians. She calls my God a "fairy tale, a myth and sky daddy".
And for a list of not only deleted posts but deleted threads, go to "General Chat" or "Politics" and scroll down...........

We had this back and forth on my thread, and I explained why I chose that title.
http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/specialty-forums/politics/544582-short-lived-thread-i-expect.html


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

farmrbrown said:


> She most certainly DOES spin a thread to attack Christians. She calls my God a "fairy tale, a myth and sky daddy".


When they say that, I feel it's also an attack on their friends and family who believe. I don't believe, but I'd never criticize or belittle those that do, because I'd also be insulting my own family.

My body, my choice gets old really fast


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmrbrown said:


> I don't know what site you've been reading, but lemme help you out.
> She most certainly DOES spin a thread to attack Christians. She calls my God a "fairy tale, a myth and sky daddy".
> And for a list of not only deleted posts but deleted threads, go to "General Chat" or "Politics" and scroll down...........
> 
> ...


Hey, I don't use "sky daddy" anymore... not since I realized just how offensive it was. 

ETA: My friends and family aren't christian extremists.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I don't have to answer you because I'm above you gets old really fast also.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

farmrbrown said:


> I don't know what site you've been reading, but lemme help you out.
> She most certainly DOES spin a thread to attack Christians. She calls my God a "fairy tale, a myth and sky daddy".
> And for a list of not only deleted posts but deleted threads, go to "General Chat" or "Politics" and scroll down...........
> 
> ...


She can say that. Just so you know. But this thread really wasn't about that. And it really doesn't cross any lines that people here don't regularly cross when they call into question the intelligence of Democrats, Liberals, and then shove everyone into that category whether the categorized person thinks they belong there or not. To me... All that happened in this thread is people here can take it but they can't dish it out. Your sacred cow shouldn't be any safer than anyone else'. We all have religious freedom, remember? I don't think your God exists at all. I think a god may exist. It think the bible, starting with Moses, was nothing more than the weakness of humanity coming through in bold print. Starting with Moses' genocidal tendencies. I think religion is a scam. 

Now that I've said all that, I still haven't questioned the intelligence of Christians; which is a regular theme around here regarding Democrats and Liberals. I haven't outright insulted anyone, you're just offended by my beliefs and you would prefer that I be....wait for it..........*POLITICALLY CORRECT.*


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

oneraddad said:


> When they say that, I feel it's also an attack on their friends and family who believe. I don't believe, but I'd never criticize or belittle those that do, because I'd also be insulting my own family.
> 
> My body, my choice gets old really fast





oneraddad said:


> I don't have to answer you because I'm above you gets old really fast also.


You can put me on ignore, that way you won't see the things that upset you. It won't hurt my feelings.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

I still cannot see page 7, but I can see page 8??

Are we still arguing the reason this topic was started?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I still cannot see page 7, but I can see page 8??
> 
> Are we still arguing the reason this topic was started?


I think we are off on other arguments now


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> You can put me on ignore, that way you won't see the things that upset you. It won't hurt my feelings.



I'm not upset, unlike you my emotions don't control me.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

oneraddad said:


> I'm not upset, unlike you my emotions don't control me.


I could argue that but since I'm on my way out the door to go shopping. I'll just say, "Have a wonderful day" and leave it at that.


----------



## Shine (Feb 19, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> I don't have to explain what or why I post to you or anyone else, but if you read the post you responded to it explains why. I'll even go in and bold it for you.


No thank you, no need. I see what you are doing. :whistlin:


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)




----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

wiscto said:


> She can say that. Just so you know. But this thread really wasn't about that. And it really doesn't cross any lines that people here don't regularly cross when they call into question the intelligence of Democrats, Liberals, and then shove everyone into that category whether the categorized person thinks they belong there or not. To me... All that happened in this thread is people here can take it but they can't dish it out. Your sacred cow shouldn't be any safer than anyone else'. We all have religious freedom, remember? I don't think your God exists at all. I think a god may exist. It think the bible, starting with Moses, was nothing more than the weakness of humanity coming through in bold print. Starting with Moses' genocidal tendencies. I think religion is a scam.
> 
> Now that I've said all that, I still haven't questioned the intelligence of Christians; which is a regular theme around here regarding Democrats and Liberals. I haven't outright insulted anyone, you're just offended by my beliefs and you would prefer that I be....wait for it..........*POLITICALLY CORRECT.*


I didn't think this thread was about: Liberals, Conservatives, Moderates or Independents.
I didn't think this was about christians, muslims, buddists, hindi's or pagans.
I didn't think this thread was about souls, w/ or with; animal sacrifices or magic spells.
I didn't think this thread was about PC or UN PC.

I was dead sure what this thread was about.
That is why I participated.
I AM dead sure that many times, by many members, on both sides of the isle, tried to derail this thread and make it something it was not.
I AM dead sure there was/is a lot of nastiness that brings nothing to the thread.

I want to go shopping.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

wiscto said:


> She can say that. Just so you know. But this thread really wasn't about that. And it really doesn't cross any lines that people here don't regularly cross when they call into question the intelligence of Democrats, Liberals, and then shove everyone into that category whether the categorized person thinks they belong there or not. To me... All that happened in this thread is people here can take it but they can't dish it out. Your sacred cow shouldn't be any safer than anyone else'. We all have religious freedom, remember? I don't think your God exists at all. I think a god may exist. It think the bible, starting with Moses, was nothing more than the weakness of humanity coming through in bold print. Starting with Moses' genocidal tendencies. I think religion is a scam.
> 
> Now that I've said all that, I still haven't questioned the intelligence of Christians; which is a regular theme around here regarding Democrats and Liberals. I haven't outright insulted anyone, you're just offended by my beliefs and you would prefer that I be....wait for it..........*POLITICALLY CORRECT.*



I'm gonna correct your false statement about me one more darn time and hope you don't repeat it.
I don't give a rat's ass about what y'all say. I can take it all day long and then some, and still get in a day's work.
What I've said a 1,000+ times including my own thread, is that when it's dished back out, the MODS delete the post, delete the thread and give infractions.
Pal, I can dish it out and take it with the best of'em.
Getting in the ring, when the referee is biased, ain't somethin' I'm in to.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

if you quote the nasty stuff that you pm a mod in nasty it stays but if you copy and give the poster credit for their wit.... it's and infraction?... if it was only nasty in my mind per a mod letting it stay what does that mean... that one and only infraction was worth it...

no bias right​


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I didn't think this thread was about: Liberals, Conservatives, Moderates or Independents.
> I didn't think this was about christians, muslims, buddists, hindi's or pagans.
> I didn't think this thread was about souls, w/ or with; animal sacrifices or magic spells.
> I didn't think this thread was about PC or UN PC.
> ...


I think what it could have been about is one thing...but we're all used to a pattern of intent, so coming as it did, from someone with a pattern, yeah it's hard to ignore that. If this was the first thread to pop up about a Christian doing (whatever), it would be easier to address the (whatever). It's just that a theme gets old.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Having Been here a while some ex smoker are the worst about smoking
Ex Catholics are pretty bitter.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

farmrbrown said:


> I'm gonna correct your false statement about me one more darn time and hope you don't repeat it.
> I don't give a rat's ass about what y'all say. I can take it all day long and then some, and still get in a day's work.
> What I've said a 1,000+ times including my own thread, is that when it's dished back out, the MODS delete the post, delete the thread and give infractions.
> Pal, I can dish it out and take it with the best of'em.
> Getting in the ring, when the referee is biased, ain't somethin' I'm in to.


The only reason you think the mods are bias is because you are failing to recognize the bad behavior of people whose bias leans your way. That's the last dang time I'm gonna say it.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

I've got a pot of stew on and I'm hunkering down and not going anywhere.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

kasilofhome said:


> Having Been here a while some ex smoker are the worst about smoking
> Ex Catholics are pretty bitter.



That's me ! 

Stop Smoking !!! Stop Drinking !!! It's Bad !!! Don't Do It !!!


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Woolieface said:


> I think what it could have been about is one thing...but we're all used to a pattern of intent, so coming as it did, from someone with a pattern, yeah it's hard to ignore that. If this was the first thread to pop up about a Christian doing (whatever), it would be easier to address the (whatever). It's just that a theme gets old.



I WHOLE heartedley agree with you.
YES IP is notorious for not being a fan of chrisitans/or their faith.

BUT

I read everything she posted......the link, etc.
And she was SPOT ON.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt.
In this case, I am glad I did.

This was not about "SEE ALL CHRISTIANS ARE BAD" as much as it was "Some people who claim christianity grossly misuse God's Word to hurt people". 
And it's a topic that needs to be talked about.
If ONE woman does a google search, and finds this thread, and calls an advocate to help herself get out of an abusive situation.

Good.
Excellent.
Praise the Lord.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by Woolieface View Post
> I think what it could have been about is one thing...but we're all used to a pattern of intent, so coming as it did, from someone with a pattern, yeah it's hard to ignore that. If this was the first thread to pop up about a Christian doing (whatever), it would be easier to address the (whatever). *It's just that a theme gets old*.


Lots of themes get old, but they still get repeated every day.
You can only control what you do, not what others do.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I WHOLE heartedley agree with you.
> YES IP is notorious for not being a fan of chrisitans/or their faith.
> 
> BUT
> ...


I think we could have gotten somewhere if we could have all talked about this issue in every facet of society. That was sort of shut down. Shutting stuff down sucks. It happens here too much.


----------



## Miss Kay (Mar 31, 2012)

To get back on subject, all I can say is this guy has to have a horrible marriage. His wife must cringe when he walks in the room since he has no clue what a good marriage is about. I on the other hand was lucky enough to marry a wonderful man 41 years ago who really does do all those things quoted in the bible (loves me like God loved the church etc.) and boy am I thankful. Too many of you are assuming its the husband who is always making the first move. There really are wives who lust after their own husbands. Not calling any names, just saying!


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Hey, I don't use "sky daddy" anymore... not since I realized just how offensive it was.
> 
> ETA: My friends and family aren't christian extremists.



Thank you, I have noticed that and I do appreciate it.

I had to be corrected in much the same way and no longer say anything about praying for someone unless they ask for it. It didn't occur to me that it would offend someone. 



wiscto said:


> The only reason you think the mods are bias is because you are failing to recognize the bad behavior of people whose bias leans your way. That's the last dang time I'm gonna say it.


No, I can recognize bad behavior in man or beast. I could give a multitude of examples where I admonished someone or tried to deflect there words if they got too mean spirited, bias notwithstanding. Why would a rational person think a harsh remark, would be persuasive if it was made in defense of something I believed in?
Even if they can't be persuaded, insulting them won't make you any friends, or even gain you the respect of your foes.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

I know Everyone has their own perspective but this is what I saw on the first sentence of the OP.


_*No one actually believes that a wife/partner can't say no to sex, right? This can't a commonly held belief. Can it? *_

And then there was an example of it. In the original question there was no mention of Christian marital rape so I just assumed it was an example of one account of it. So when FB chimed in about Muslim beliefs I thought it was valid question. I can see that I was wrong now and it was indeed about just Christians doing this sort of thing. 

So since this seems to be a biased convo I will bow out of it now.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Woolieface said:


> I think we could have gotten somewhere *if we could have all talked* about this issue in every facet of society. That was sort of shut down. Shutting stuff down sucks. It happens here too much.


Nothing was stopping anyone from starting their own thread.
This one is about the example given in the OP.

Instead, some just wanted to derail this one


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Woolieface said:


> I think we could have gotten somewhere if we could have all talked about this issue in every facet of society. That was sort of shut down. Shutting stuff down sucks. It happens here too much.


Woolie, this thread was about the "misuse of God's Word".

I know nothing of the muslim religion, and if I posted a topic or replied to a topic about 'marital rape because someone is misusing the muslim religion' I wouldn't know what I was taking about; I don't know the religion. I have no experience or knowledge of the muslim religion......so if I 'spoke' to it, I could / probably would misspeak.

Westboro grossly misuses The Word of God......
This butt clown, grossly misuses The Word of God......

I know a little bit about the Word of God, so I can speak to / recognize the misuse.
Instead of 'jumping all over a member' look at the content of the piece.

What this clown is spewing, happens, for real......
I am sure other religions and non religious men use different excuses and ways to abuse their wives......
But this piece was about how a man, is telling men, how to abuse their wives and MISUSE God's Word to justify it!!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

There is nothing new about misinterpreting written words. It happens all the time. I have even seen it happen right here in this forum.if it can happen here with one liners, I am positive a book like the bible that's hundreds of pages long would give a preacher plenty of opportunity to do so.


----------

