I really didn't know this level of male chauvinism existed in the Christian world...
Please tell me this is a spoof site?
"I feel that today we make far too many excuses for the sin of sexual denial in marriage, and as men of God we must address this issue without pulling punches."
"The phrase “A wife does not have the right over her own body, but her husband does.” could not be clearer. A wife does not have the right to stand and deny her husband access to her body. As I said in the previous post, a wife can humbly ask for a “delay”, or “raincheck”, but only for legitimate physical or psychological reasons and the judge of what is legitimate or not is her husband."
"Her second choice is to react to your “is that a no” with a “Yep, it’s a no”. In that case you have to move to a different strategy that with I will address in my next post, “How to handle your wife’s sexual refusal”."
http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/05/16/is-a-husband-selfish-for-havin...
Previous article:
http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/04/28/christian-husbands-you-dont-pa...
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
No joke. It is 100% real, and 101% stupid.
Just read a number of this guy's other stuff as well. Wow. He's a piece of work.
Such religious dogma results in hard feelings.
Excuse me ma'am, do you have a moment to talk about divorce?
: )
Just goes to show that the bible was obviously written by penise... err, I mean men.
The guy's a crack pot. I wouldn't broadbrush christian behavior with his take on sex. He's a one-off. Two marriages in 15 years tells me he's part of the problem and probably got the boot from his first wife for his chauvinism. Christianity - 1, Idiot - 0.
I always found it hillarious that a good many of the religious "rules" and preachings have to do with supressing sex, then sudenly, the women are supposed to " comply" with a vengeance like slaves after all that anti-sex teaching? Typical theism...hypocrites!!
It has been like that from Christianity's creation and before, and is one of the things they haven't change yet.
They just don't talk about it, that is all.
Unlike this guy, which is shooting his own foot with it.
Although I do understand that if there is sexual problems, then there is something wrong with the marriage, though unlike what he is saying, both man and woman should have sexual rights in a good marriage, not just the man.
In that case, there are other options like counselling, divorce, abstinence( :) ), etc....
Forcing someone against his will to do sex is immoral.
In a mature sens, even if a man promised to do sex but later decided that he didn't like to do sex with his wife, he should not be forced to do it but his wife has the right to divorce, etc....
(switching it to man's perspective just show equality about this subject)
The dogmatic idea that once you promised something, you cannot change it, is a false premise, especially since humans don't usually remain the same person with age.(priorities change, motivations change)
It is not a natural process to be dogmatic but to be adaptive is the natural process.
We are constantly adapting to the current environment.
Of course, accepting this fact is like saying that god had nothing to do with marriage and that is not gonna happen, even if there is a mountain of facts to prove it like Divorced people.
EDIT:
Whoever believes this Phrase:
"Whatever GOD joins, No one can separate"
Is screaming "I AM VERY STUPID" out laud.
:)
It's not just chauvinism; gender inequality is a core component of religion. Nearly gods first meaningful interaction with man - after creating man - is to create woman. And for what? To fulfill mans desires.
This soft misogyny is at the core of all the controlling, limiting, abusive behavior enacted upon the female faithful.
Of course it is, because property has no say in this.
And in the Bible, woman is property.
You know, I am glad my wife and I were atheists. I never truly knew about that bullshit in Christianity. All I can say about that guy who wrote those articles is that is a King Prick. At least our atheist marriage was in the heart, in the soul, in the mind, and not in God. Of course, we had to have a marriage performed by the Magistrate since, at that time, North Carolina did not recognize any marriage unless it was performed by a "Christian ordained by law." I still think North Carolina requires such a marriage, but have never looked it up.
As far as a wife being the property of the husband, then why cannot the reverse also be true? I was raised by my father who told me it is the WOMAN'S right to decide whom she wishes to marry and whether she wants sex or not. Of course, the husband can give clues and hints, but the woman still has the right to refuse. While they were still alive, I always treated my wife as being my Queen, our daughters as my Princesses, and I was their lowly servant. 'Nuff said.
rmfr
One of the first countries to criminalize rape in marriage was that international bastion of human rights, the Soviet Union, in 1922. Most Western democracies didn't take that step until the 1980s or later. In 2018 rape in marriage is still not an offense in many countries.
Here's the Christian moral stance on this, as expressed by Paul in Corinthians 7:4
The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
As an amoral atheist, I believe 'no' always means 'no', regardless of the relationship, and that a 'yes' extracted with violence or threats is a 'no'.
1st Corinthians 7:4 certainly puts a whole new light on the masturbation thing.
rmfr
Christianity justifying rape. You have read the bible haven't you?
@ Sheldon
I know you weren't replying to me, but I have read the Bible several times. Just those verses never clicked with me. I guess it was because of the relationship me wife and I had.
rmfr