Or from the standpoint of religious-right Christians.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Is it possible for a husband to rape his wife?
Collapse
X
-
In a free country, it depends on the marriage contract, and is left to the couple in question to decide at the time of marriage. In most modern states, yes, it is possible.
(It's quite bizarre why this isn't extended to the economic sphere, though. Ancient alimony and "child support" laws, designed during the days of intact families and when a man couldn't rape his wife by definition, continue to cause untold misery. The sacralisation of physical consent, and the loosening of the sexual obligations of women, should have been simultaneously matched by the sacralisation of consent in the provisioning of economic resources and an equivalent of the loosening of the financial obligations of men. That was, at its root, what the old contract was based on - consenting to marriage was considered as equivalent to pre-consenting to any sexual activity within it, and on the man's side was considered equal to a commitment to financial provisioning of the pair. Hence alimony. If it had to be gotten rid of, it should have been gotten rid of wholesale. Otherwise, in time, rational actors will come less and less to engage in it, as the disincentives for one party outweigh the incentives, as is the case in most Western societies today (and as is happening in other societies attempting to follow that pattern).)
Comment
-
In a free country, it depends on the marriage contract, and is left to the couple in question to decide at the time of marriage.
No. You cannot consent by contract to all sexual contact at any future point whatever your willingness at that moment. Just like you can't contract to give somebody the right to cut off one of your toes without the option to change your mind later.
12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View PostIn a free country, it depends on the marriage contract, and is left to the couple in question to decide at the time of marriage.
No. You cannot consent by contract to all sexual contact at any future point whatever your willingness at that moment. Just like you can't contract to give somebody the right to cut off one of your toes without the option to change your mind later.
And you didn't address the thrust of what I said, regarding the obligations of the other side of the party. If one part is nullified, so should the other be. No longer should the husband be forced to support his wife once the union is dissolved. The same logic applies - you cannot "consent" to perpetually supporting someone without having an option to later opt out, no matter your willingness at that moment.
Comment
-
Originally posted by aneeshm View PostI know. Which is why I said, "In a free country". We aren't living in free countries, or anything close.
And you've obviously never heard of a "pre-nuptial agreement".
Holy ****. Learn something before you open your silly mouth.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Given that nobody would ever have sex with him except in return for a cash payment or at gunpoint, I can definitely see why he would read this thread that way.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Originally posted by loinburger View PostSo if I read this correctly, aneeshm says that in a free country marriage is a contract in which one side perpetually forks over money and the other side perpetually forks over sex?
(Is it really that hard to get what I'm saying? Is there something in what I write which makes it difficult to understand?)
Comment
-
Yes it is possible. It may sound silly because, well it's his wife, but it's not his wife, if you get the distinction. He doesn't own her."Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
"I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi
Comment
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View Post
Sorry, but my definition of freedom doesn't include that kind of contract.
EDIT: It seems that your idea of "consent" is based on the idea of inalienable rights. I'm not a believer in inalienable rights. If you have a right, you can alienate it all you want. Otherwise, how is it a right at all? So consent is absolute, because it's derived from a right to your body. But like all others, you can alienate it in specific contractual situations.
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View Post
And you've obviously never heard of a "pre-nuptial agreement".Last edited by aneeshm; June 6, 2010, 16:10.
Comment
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View PostGiven that nobody would ever have sex with him except in return for a cash payment or at gunpoint, I can definitely see why he would read this thread that way.
Comment
-
You have little to no understanding of anything, from all evidence.
You're a spoiled little brat in a ****hole 3rd world country who thinks that he's a great deal more clever than he actually is. In reality, your world view is pedestrian and juvenile.
12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio Regum
Comment
-
Originally posted by KrazyHorse View Post
You have little to no understanding of anything, from all evidence.
You're a spoiled little brat in a ****hole 3rd world country who thinks that he's a great deal more clever than he actually is. In reality, your world view is pedestrian and juvenile.
Many laughs and insults do not an argument make, KH. Specially not from someone in your position; it's not as if your world-view has resulted in any great things.
Comment
Comment