By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape.
[5/10/2008 1:45:17 ]
Fundie Index: 13
Submitted By: Sayna
If she's not willing to have sex at a given time, and you have sex with her then against her will, IT'S FUCKING RAPE.
Damn right. And by walking past me on the street wearing a short skirt, a woman has consented to sex. So I don't think you can call it rape.
(I'm not serious, by the way. Just in case anyone thought I was.)
Allegory for Jesus
Oh wow! Sudden urge to marry this woman! Aside from that: no. Marriage does not mean that your husband can force you to have sex with him at his command. If you refuse sex on all occasions, well...that's what divorces are for, I suppose. But, no, marriage =/= sex slavery.
Well, then you thought wrong. It's rape if it's against her will, whether they're married, dating, or strangers. Dumbfuck.
Wait... a WOMAN said this? D:
I'm sorry, I failed to see any part of the marriage contract that states "I will have sex whenever, wherever", and if it did it would be illegal.
Darn! I thought she was buried with the other relics like Reagan and Falwell!!
The Holey Bibble also states that a married woman has complete domain over her husband's body, not just him over hers.
Ya hear that, girls? You can rape your husband back!
If she's refusing to have sex, he can divorce her ass. But he can't rape her. Stupid fundie.
Because "no means yes."
That miserable old bag is still alive? Damn. I wonder if she even realizes that it is because of feminist efforts that she could go to law school and have the career that she has. Bitch isn't a homemaker. You can't be a housewife and tour the country making offensive statements at your speaking events.
So, what does this mean? Phyllis Schlafly either sees marriage as a form of female slavery, is a nymphomaniac, or has a rape fetish. All of these prospects give me the willies.
@KatAutumn: That's the sad irony. She and Ann Coulter speak out against feminists, yet seemingly are ignorant of the fact that it is because of feminism that they can speak out at all.
Why is it that before marriage a woman's knees should never part but afterwards they must always be a part?
Ah yes..a woman justifying Rape.
Just like Malkin, an Asian american defends internment camps
And Roy Cohn went after Gays.
And Governor Blackwell of Ohio, A Black Man, disenfranchised black voters.
Sometimes I think Conservatives only want minorities in their ranks so they can make it easier to screw minorities.
Sounds like Phylis needs a good fuck up the ass.
By that logic, if I buy, say, a toaster, I 've consented to being eletrocuted if it's faulty?
Because we're a male-oriented society, and, generally, men are raving, greedy, horny beasts?(Not all of you. Just a lot of you.)
No means NO, you idiot.
I read the article from this quote was taken and, among other things, Ms. Schlafly (BTW: one of her sons runs Conservapedia) states that she couldn't remember any particular issue about which she'd changed her mind in the last 40 years.
Father: "Dammit, listen to me, I have 40 years of experience."
Son, thinking: He has 1 year of experience repeated 40 times.
The law (in non-socially retarded countries) disagrees with you.
So were in the vows does it say that?
Unless she for any reason is not willing. Even if married, she is raped. Fuck you MS.Sclafly. Damn rape apologists
And guess what her reaction would be if her husband ever tried to test that particular viewpoint on her?
Speaking of Conservapedia, their highlight article is Atheism today (5-9-08). If you haven't checked it out previously, and you are a bit of a masochist for lies and a myriad of other logical fallacies, I suggest you go read it.