Where is everybody when it comes to 1 Corinthians 7:3-5?

[Drich]

I have strong romantic feelings for my girlfriend, but if she wants intimacy, and I don't, then if I submit, because I have to "live and serve my spouse," before my own, that's rape.

Two things A girlfriend is not a spouce. and two if you submit to sex whether or not you really want to, your submition means it is not rape.
How can I say this? It is by the definition of Rape and Spouce
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...glish/rape
(To force sex against another's will is the definition of Rape. If one submits then and both agree to have sex then it is not rape.)
A spouce is either a husband or wife according to the official definition.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...ish/spouse

Do you see how far you have to bend the English language in order to make your argument? to feel offended?
You had to basically change what was written and replace it with a command authorizing the rape of a in general sexual partner.

what if... the bible didn't actually authorize rape, but instead tell MARRIED Couples that we should not just think of ourselves and only have sex when both are in desperate need of it. What if, the bible says that we should be mindful of our spouse' needs and provide them with sex even if we are not in desperate need of it?

This verse was a huge problem back when I was a sex repulsed catholic, also when I thought I was asexual. I didn't want to have to consent to sexual encounters because it grossed me out. I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like if my girlfriend and I were in a catholic marriage and I had to submit to her while I was repulsed. To this day, I'm still repulsed by certain activities.

Then maybe you shouldn't get married. Because marriage is not about you. You seem to be more worried about you than providing for your spouse. What Paul is saying here is Sex is indeed apart of the provision/obligation married couples have to one another. If you can't provide for her then maybe it is best you do not marry someone you know going into a relationship you cant provide for. Because ultimately it will fail.

That's the problem with that passage. It doesn't take into consideration certain circumstances.

Actually it does. If you read the whole chapter Paul says unless you burn with uncontrollable sexual desire, you should get married.

If just 2 things were different, (1) my gf being a conservative catholic(she's a united methodist), and (2) us being married, then I would have no say in the matter regarding sex. If she wanted it, I'd have to provide it for her and likewise, if I wanted it. I wouldn't be able to live with myself if she says "yes" because an ancient book obligated her to.

The point of the criticism of this passage is nobody needs to "serve" the needs of their spouse regarding sex. If you don't want it, you don't have to have it. If you want it, but your spouse doesn't, you can always take care of it yourself. It's that simple.

Again that type of selfish behavior simply means your are not ready to enter into what it means to be married. Because again, Marriage is not about you first. It is about providing for your spouse's needs and then your own. If you put the other person first and she yours you will truly know love and respect in the full fillment of your needs through the actions of your spouse.