(June 24, 2015 at 6:17 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: [...]
I believe the charge of "condoning" has been answered, and those controversialist who wish to continue making the accusation simply demonstrate themselves to be incapable of reasoning and lacking in goodwill. Further discussion with people of that sort is not a good use of time.
And you still haven't answered the question - is there such a thing as marital rape in your fancy book. Or is it true, that according to the authors once a woman is married, she belongs to her husband and has no right to refuse him sex (unless she's on her period, or otherwise "unclean" - and even then it seems to be the husband's decision)?
Come on, spit it out: as far as your god is concerned - you can rape your wife to your heart's content.
And why exactly can't a raped woman be considered marriage material? All it would take is a passage in the bible, saying that rape is not considered sex and raped woman is pure in the eyes of the lord. But I suppose your god is too much of a coward to want to piss off barbaric shepherds like that, isn't he?
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
