Rape Within Marriage?

[Bookcat]

What are you really saying?
Can a wife refuse her husband (sexually) if he’s violent, she’s afraid of getting pregnant, or because the the wife simply isn’t interested, or not?

Yes there are valid reasons to “refuse” for the time martial relations.

For example a husband who is drunk or I imagine being violent (such as at that time) or has committed adultery …etc

But not simply cause she is not “interested”. Such could be of course discussed and agreed upon by them (excepting a near occasion of serious sin).

Likewise the husband the wife.

 

[severus68]

Just to let you know in the UK it was legal for a husband to rape his wife up until 1993.

Kinda scary when you think about it.

But it’s extremely wrong to forceably have sex with anyone regardless if you are married to them or not. Indeed I’d think its even worse as you’re supposed to have a higher level of love and respect for your spouse.

It is scarier when some people of religion still say there is no such thing as marital rape.

I agree, force is wrong and never justified.

 

[Bookcat]

I agree, force is wrong and never justified.

So do I.

As I imagine do all here.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Just to let you know in the UK it was legal for a husband to rape his wife up until 1993.

Kinda scary when you think about it.

But it’s extremely wrong to forceably have sex with anyone regardless if you are married to them or not. Indeed I’d think its even worse as you’re supposed to have a higher level of love and respect for your spouse.

It makes (horrible) sense in context.
Remember, a man’s wife used to be considered his property.
You can’t steal from yourself

 

[Bookcat]

It makes (horrible) sense in context.
Remember, a man’s wife used to be considered his property.
You can’t steal from yourself

Such would NOT be what anyone would hold here.

The nature of marriage involves mutual rights and equal dignity.

Such is missing entirely the point of any discussion of theological terms.

 

[severus68]

So do I.

As I imagine do all here.

Unfortunately, there are some Catholics who say it is fine for a man to force his wife. I have read what they say. I am not sure if any of them lurk on CAF.

 

[Walking_Home]

Bookcat:

So do I.

As I imagine do all here.

Unfortunately, there are some Catholics who say it is fine for a man to force his wife. I have read what they say. I am not sure if any of them lurk on CAF.

---

Yes-- I agree. There are some men with that belief.

 

[Bookcat]

---

Yes-- I agree. There are some men with that belief.

Such would be though a belief contrary to the Teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[severus68]

Such would be though a belief contrary to the Teachings of the Catholic Church.

Yes that is very true so in posts like this, we should state clearly that forcing your wife to have sex is wrong, immoral and sinful. When someone instead posts with a “but no one should refuse her husband sex except for …”, that certainly appears to be putting a caveat on that position.

 

[Nate13]

@Severus
Look we completely agree on the complete despicable immorality of a husband forcing himself on his wife, which is an equal if not greater evil than a rape between non married people.

The only thing in contention here is how to describe it. As Bookcat has described when a married man cheats on his wife its called adultery not fornication. You might argue that adultery is actually worse than fornication because not only are you using someone else for your own ends, you also breaking the covenant you made with your spouse.

This point is all I was trying to hammer home. I think I was careful to make sure I was not downplaying the evil of a husband forcing himself on his wife multiple times in my posts earlier, but I wanted to make sure the record was set straight. It seems to me anymore its just not worth arguing about what to call it, but I think its important to point out the differences because in my opinion a “rape” within marriage is actually a worse crime and deserves to be called out as such and not wrapped in with a rape in general.

 

[Nate13]

Yes that is very true so in posts like this, we should state clearly that forcing your wife to have sex is wrong, immoral and sinful. When someone instead posts with a “but no one should refuse her husband sex except for …”, that certainly appears to be putting a caveat on that position.

No its looking at the situation from two different perspectives.

To the husband: You can never force yourself on your wife. If your wife says no, even if she doesn’t have a good reason, that does not change anything and you cannot force yourself on her, period.

To the wife: You should not deny your husband without a serious reason.

This goes vice versa as well but in most cases we are talking about a man forcing himself on his wife so I used that above. I don’t understand why you see this as a caveat. I feel like your looking for something to take offense at.

 

[Bookcat]

Yes that is very true so in posts like this, we should state clearly that forcing your wife to have sex is wrong, immoral and sinful. When someone instead posts with a “but no one should refuse her husband sex except for …”, that certainly appears to be putting a caveat on that position.

Such was done.

And adding the other aspect is not negating the sinfulness of “force” etc

 

[Bookcat]

adultery is actually worse than fornication because not only are you using someone your also breaking the covenant you made with your spouse.
.

Yes it is. And such needs to be confessed as such.

 

[severus68]

No its looking at the situation from two different perspectives.

To the husband: You can never force yourself on your wife. If your wife says no, even if she doesn’t have a good reason, that does not change anything and you cannot force yourself on her, period.

To the wife: You should not deny your husband without a serious reason.

This goes vice versa as well but in most cases we are talking about a man forcing himself on his wife so I used that above. I don’t understand why you see this as a caveat. I feel like your looking for something to take offense at.

Why must the great wrong of a husband forcing his wife be tied to conjugal rights at all? You appear to be then equating marital rape to the wrong of unreasonably refusing sex or making both of equivalent wrong.

I do not see any single woman being able to physically force her husband to have sex with her so that is a non arguement.

 

[Nate13]

Why must the great wrong of a husband forcing his wife be tied to conjugal rights at all? You appear to be then equating marital rape to the wrong of unreasonably refusing sex or making both of equivalent wrong.

I do not see any single woman being able to physically force her husband to have sex with her so that is a non argument.

Because its worse than a “normal rape” just as adultery is worse than fornication. A covenant is being broken in the case of a husband forcing himself on his wife and in the case of a husband cheating on his wife. Have you read the curses God said he would call down on Israel if they broke the covenant he made with them?

Also, I’m not equating them at all. Rather I was explaining why it was not a caveat as you claimed. A wife unreasonably denying her husband sex is wrong, but no one is equating that to a husband forcing himself on his wife. You are again trying to find offense where none is warranted.

 

[severus68]

Because its worse than a “normal rape” just as adultery is worse than fornication. A covenant is being broken in the case of a husband forcing himself on his wife and in the case of a husband cheating on his wife. Have you read the curses God said he would call down on Israel if they broke the covenant he made with them?

Also, I’m not equating them at all. Rather I was explaining why it was not a caveat as you claimed. A wife unreasonably denying her husband sex is wrong, but no one is equating that to a husband forcing himself on his wife. You are again trying to find offense where none is warranted.

I am not trying to find offense however many times you say it. I always hold out the Catholic Church to be the most enlightened, the one most protective of human rights, most progresssive about women.

If its worse than rape and ‘marital rape’ is not appropriate for some of you than I would think you could come up with a term. It is not enough to reject something in this case, it is necessary to come up with an alternative.

 

[Nate13]

I am not trying to find offense however many times you say it. I always hold out the Catholic Church to be the most enlightened, the one most protective of human rights, most progresssive about women.

If its worse than rape and ‘marital rape’ is not appropriate for some of you than I would think you could come up with a term. It is not enough to reject something in this case, it is necessary to come up with an alternative.

I don’t really care so much about what you call it as making sure its recognized why the sins are different as adultery and fornication are different. The OP seemed to have some confusion over why “rape within marriage” is considered a sin. Someone who would claim rape within marriage is not a sin would probably quote 1 Cor 7:3 to back their view. I attempted to explain why that passage does not mean a husband has the right to force himself on his wife based in the context of the entire passage. Just calling this forced act in marriage “rape” can leave a lot of confusion for those who might read that.

 

[Bookcat]

Spousal sexual assault

 

[Baelor]

Spousal sexual assault

Rape: “the crime of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with him without their consent and against their will”

Sexual assault is a superset of rape. There is no possible way one can justify calling marital rape – if one acknowledges that spouses can be forced against their will sexually – anything but rape. If you need an additional layer of specificity to differentiate the act from rape of an unmarried person, “marital rape” is more than sufficient.

Providing a label that would be equally applicable to kissing one’s spouse forcefully is totally counterproductive and, quite frankly, bizarre.

 

[Bookcat]

Rape: “the crime of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with him without their consent and against their will”

Sexual assault is a superset of rape. There is no possible way one can justify calling marital rape – if one acknowledges that spouses can be forced against their will sexually – anything but rape. If you need an additional layer of specificity to differentiate the act from rape of an unmarried person, “marital rape” is more than sufficient.

Providing a label that would be equally applicable to kissing one’s spouse forcefully is totally counterproductive and, quite frankly, bizarre.

Rape does not fit the sin here. Rape can be said to be the forced sexual intercourse where the parties are not married to each other. Just as fornication is sexual intercourse outside of marriage that is consented to by both parties. And Adultery is sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other but with one of them at least being married to another. Their act can never be termed fornication.

Dictionaries do not always take into account theological realities.

Someone asked a more appropiate term and I suggested one.
*
Spousal sexual assault.*