Originally posted by FMFI have stated that consent to yield authority over ones body has been given, I have not stated that consent to use force against that body has been given.
Thread 165786, Page 18.
[b]FMF: "The issue is the victim's "will" at the time of sexual intercourse. If it is done against her will then it is rape and it is a moral atrocity."
robbie carrobie: "Consent has already been given."[/b]
So where have i stated FMF that anyone can be forced to do anything, please produce it now or explain why you are fabricating argument that people have not made.
I have not stated that a woman can't be made to have sex against her will because her "consent" was implicit in her marriage vows, in fact i have not stated that force can be used against anyone. Produce a single iota where i have stated that force can be used against anyone. If you cannot then you have simply once again been caught lyingly making argument that people themselves have not made.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou were being asked how you could possibly describe a woman who is being made to have sex against her will as having already given her consent.
I have stated that consent to yield authority over ones body has been given, I have not stated that consent to use force against that body has been given.
So where have i stated FMF that anyone can be forced to do anything, please produce it now or explain why you are fabricating argument that people have not made.
Page 20, same thread.
FMF: "The "consent" is surely to have a sexual relationship and for there to be sexual intercourse during the marriage, right? Surely it is does not mean that a wife must submit to sex against her will when she doesn't want to have sex? That can't be your perspective, surely?
robbie carrobie: "If someone has consented to yielding authority over their own bodies how is it possible that they are now exercising their own will over it? surely they must renege on their original promise?"
Originally posted by FMFthere is not a single iota in the entire text which states or intimates that consent has been given to use force. All that has been stated is that consent has been given to yield authority over ones body. Where does it state that consent to use force has been given FMF for try as I might I cannot find a single instance where this has been stated and you have one again been caught lyingly trying to attribute values to people they have not professed.
Page 20, same thread.
[b]FMF: "The "consent" is surely to have a sexual relationship and for there to be sexual intercourse during the marriage, right? Surely it is does not mean that a wife must submit to sex against her will when she doesn't want to have sex? That can't be your perspective, surely?
robbie carrobie: "If someone has consented to ...[text shortened]... y are now exercising their own will over it? surely they must renege on their original promise?"[/b]
Page 20, same thread.
Asked about a women being forced to have sex against her will:
robbie carrobie: "She has consented as has her husband to yield authority over there own bodies in the matter of sexual expression. If consent has been given I do not see why (and lets be clear about this you have failed to explain why), it can be construed as rape, by definition."
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAsked why why she can be forced to have sex against her will you kept saying, she's already given her consent, she's already given her consent, she's already given her consent.
there is not a single iota in the entire text which states or intimates that consent has been given to use force. All that has been stated is that consent has been given to yield authority over ones body. Where does it state that consent to use force has been given FMF for try as I might I cannot find a single instance where this has been stated an ...[text shortened]... have one again been caught lyingly trying to attribute values to people they have not professed.
Originally posted by FMFNot a single iota which states that consent to use force has been given and rather interestingly you seem unable to produce one.
Page 20, same thread.
Asked about a women being forced to have sex against her will:
[b]robbie carrobie: "She has consented as has her husband to yield authority over there own bodies in the matter of sexual expression. If consent has been given I do not see why (and lets be clear about this you have failed to explain why), it can be construed as rape, by definition."[/b]
FMF: "For a woman to consent to being her husband's sexual partner and bearing him children is one thing, but - morally speaking - for her to be forced to submit to sex at times when it is against her will is - morally speaking - abhorrent surely? Do you believe the marriage vows mean that a woman who has sex with her husband when she wants to, must also accept being forced to have sex when she doesn't want to?"
robbie carrobie: But they did not consent to be a sexual partner they consented to yield authority over their own bodies. Perhaps the marriage vow might be changed to 'I hereby consent to being your sexual partner when i feel like it and bearing you children if i feel like it'?"
Originally posted by FMFonce again all that has been stated is that consent to yield authority over ones body has been given, there is nothing in the statement which intimates that this includes consent to use force and no matter how often you repeat the same empty sentiments you will not find a single iota which states that it has been given and we are therefore once again left with the rather obvious scenario that you have been caught fabricating values that people have not explicitly professed. Why is known only to you.
Asked why why she can be forced to have sex against her will you kept saying, she's already given her consent, she's already given her consent, she's already given her consent.
Originally posted by FMFnot a single iota which states that consent has been given to use force, no not a single one.
[b]FMF: "For a woman to consent to being her husband's sexual partner and bearing him children is one thing, but - morally speaking - for her to be forced to submit to sex at times when it is against her will is - morally speaking - abhorrent surely? Do you believe the marriage vows mean that a woman who has sex with her husband when she wants to, must also ...[text shortened]... t to being your sexual partner when i feel like it and bearing you children if i feel like it'?"[/b]
When asked to explain the horrendous thing you were saying, repeatedly...
you copy pasted:
another purely personal perspective viewpoint question that will be ignored.
...over and over and over again in answer to a sequence of reasonable on-topic questions.
I think part of you knew you'd said something horrendous.
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePage 21, same thread.
not a single iota which states that consent has been given to use force, no not a single one.
Proper Knob: "If a man forcibly has sex with a women against her will that is by definition rape.
robbie carrobie: "If someone has already given their consent then I don't see how that can be construed as rape, by definition, which part of that you are having trouble dealing with I cannot say."
Originally posted by FMFsimply produce a single iota where it has been stated that consent to use force has been given then you might have recourse to terming anything reasonable, otherwise you have been caught again assuming values that people have not explicitly expressed.
When asked to explain the horrendous thing you were saying, repeatedly...
you copy pasted:
[b]another purely personal perspective viewpoint question that will be ignored.
...over and over and over again in answer to a sequence of reasonable on-topic questions.
I think part of you knew you'd said something horrendous.[/b]
Originally posted by FMFNot a single iota in the text which states consent to use force has been given, no not a single one. Please produce the statement where i have stated that consent to use force has been given FMF.
Page 21, same thread.
[b]Proper Knob: "If a man forcibly has sex with a women against her will that is by definition rape.
robbie carrobie: "If someone has already given their consent then I don't see how that can be construed as rape, by definition, which part of that you are having trouble dealing with I cannot say."[/b]