• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Spousal Rape - Crime of Rape, or Not ?????

Can a man be criminally/legally charged with raping his wife?

  • Yes. Absolutely.

    Votes: 57 71.3%

  • No. Definitely not.

    Votes: 4 5.0%

  • Case-by-case basis. Not that black & white.

    Votes: 17 21.3%

  • Other- please explain

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Total voters
    80
LaMidRighter said:
Yep, from what I understand she is a little hottie too, but I don't care how pretty a lady is, that's just too messed up for my tastes.
Click to expand...



Yeah, hot is nice but I tend to avoid crazy.
 
roguenuke said:
He said that there was no way to get a conviction when it came to spouses living together. Granted, he said this in 2002, so it is outdated. However, he never retracted it, and says now simply that he has no stand on the issue. He was however debating, at the time, whether the rape laws should include spousal rape, him saying that they shouldn't, that the laws should not hold spouses able to be charged for rape.

GOP Congressional Candidate: Spousal Rape Shouldn't Be a Crime | Mother Jones

Although this isn't really a current issue, he at least did hold the position that spouses (or at least husbands, because I believe VA could be one of those places that refuses to recognize that men can get raped too) should be exempt from rape prosecution.
Click to expand...
I don't see how you're getting "there should be an exemption again that basically allows for men to rape their wives" out of that. It doesn't make sense how someone cold read what you just quoted and then think he wants to legalize rape. That doesn't logically follow. Where is the exemption? Where was he quoted saying this?
 
Goshin said:
Yeah, hot is nice but I tend to avoid crazy.
Click to expand...
Every time, I would rather an average lady who makes me happy over a gorgeous psychopath. Then to come back to topic, I've heard the latest craze is rape play, I don't like that idea because it could have a chilling affect on actual rape cases.
 
LaMidRighter said:
My buddy is a JPO with the state, one of his colleagues used to date a woman who had a very odd fetish, a very concerning fetish, and a very dangerous fetish. The woman insisted he have his loaded(had to be loaded) firearm in her mouth with his hand on the trigger. For some reason she had to be on the razor's edge to be able to climax but that is about as dangerous as it gets IMO, needless to say the guy was getting worried about an accidental trigger pull because of the nature of what they were doing and left her, but damn, I don't think I could ever grant that request.
Click to expand...

I would've just left the safety on and not told her about it. :lol:

I'd switch out the mag with dummy rounds too, probably.
 
Gathomas88 said:
I would've just left the safety on and not told her about it. :lol:

I'd switch out the mag with dummy rounds too, probably.
Click to expand...
Still, I would be worried about any other issues someone like that has. :shock:
 
If marriage meant that my partner was always horny and would have sex with me at a moment's notice, then it wouldn't be a crime. However, that is not the case.
 
Senator Black said he didn't know how you could get a conviction....



That's why I've been asking members here the same thing, and no-one on this thread knows how to get a conviction either.

He opposed it because he didn't see how you could enforce it, not because he thought marriage was perpetual consent and therefore rape couldn't occur.

Rape is rape. If you can prove rape then it shouldn't matter that the perp is married to the victim.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
I don't see how you're getting "there should be an exemption again that basically allows for men to rape their wives" out of that. It doesn't make sense how someone cold read what you just quoted and then think he wants to legalize rape. That doesn't logically follow. Where is the exemption? Where was he quoted saying this?
Click to expand...

Because the argument was made to keep the exemption in place to begin with. The argument was being made by him during the vote to repeal a VA ban on prosecution of marital/spousal rape. That says that he wanted the ban on prosecution to remain, meaning that it would prevent husbands from being charged with rape of their wives.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Senator Black said he didn't know how you could get a conviction....



That's why I've been asking members here the same thing, and no-one on this thread knows how to get a conviction either.

He opposed it because he didn't see how you could enforce it, not because he thought marriage was perpetual consent and therefore rape couldn't occur.

Rape is rape. If you can prove rape then it shouldn't matter that the perp is married to the victim.
Click to expand...


On the contrary, I gave you several ways that a person could get convicted of rape during marriage. And, as I said then, it is not right to have laws that prevent prosecution of husbands for rape in place (which was what this guy was fighting to keep in place) just because there would be a problem with proof in many cases.

And that little snippet was not the whole of his argument either. He also argued that there would be a potential issue with the reputation of these husbands should a wife falsely accuse him of rape. The problem with this is that there was no reduction in the amount of proof required to show that a wife was raped when compared to some other woman. The proof required would be the same. And as long as there are any laws against rape, anyone could bring false accusations against someone else, even if the person is married.
 
roguenuke said:
Because the argument was made to keep the exemption in place to begin with. The argument was being made by him during the vote to repeal a VA ban on prosecution of marital/spousal rape. That says that he wanted the ban on prosecution to remain, meaning that it would prevent husbands from being charged with rape of their wives.
Click to expand...
What exemption? A link to a quote of the law, please, not more of you just saying so.
 
roguenuke said:
On the contrary, I gave you several ways that a person could get convicted of rape during marriage. And, as I said then, it is not right to have laws that prevent prosecution of husbands for rape in place (which was what this guy was fighting to keep in place) just because there would be a problem with proof in many cases.

And that little snippet was not the whole of his argument either. He also argued that there would be a potential issue with the reputation of these husbands should a wife falsely accuse him of rape. The problem with this is that there was no reduction in the amount of proof required to show that a wife was raped when compared to some other woman. The proof required would be the same. And as long as there are any laws against rape, anyone could bring false accusations against someone else, even if the person is married.
Click to expand...
I can't find any present or former law which exempted husbands from a rape charge.

http://ncmdr.org/state_law_chart.html

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/marital-rape-laws.html
 
Last edited:
Just because something might be difficult to prove doesn't mean it should be swept under the rug and ignored.

There are adults coming forward and accusing priests of molestation and rape that happened decades ago.

Should those cases be ignored because "they're difficult to prove"?
 
By the way - there are now three people who've voted that a man can't rape his wife.
 
Jerry said:
What exemption? A link to a quote of the law, please, not more of you just saying so.
Click to expand...

I already linked the story and there are many more confirming that this was where the argument he was making originated from. If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it. But mine has already been given. And it was not refuted. There was even a press statement made from Blacks people that said he wasn't taking a position at that time. What else was he making the comment on if not a repeal of such a law? Go ahead, you do the research.
 
Dragonfly said:
Yahoo!



So there it is.

Man and woman are married.

Can a man rape his wife? Can he be charged with the crime of rape? Sentenced and sent to jail?
That kind of rape.

Is there such a thing as spousal rape?

Does no mean no in a marriage?

Or is DICK Black's view reasonable and valid?
Click to expand...

I suppose if its an actual physically violent rape -yes...

But at the same time I have been with chicks (girlfriends) who didn't want to have sex for one reason or another but I kinda worked my way into it, and they were just trying to please me, so it was completely consensual..... That probably happens to a lot of couples anyways...

But physically forcing a woman to have sex using brute force (even if it is your wife) is rape in my mind. If you physically have to force a woman to have sex it is certainly rape.
 
Jerry said:
I can't find any present or former law which exempted husbands from a rape charge.

STATE LAW CHART
Click to expand...

Then you are not looking well enough. There have been many posted in this very thread and in fact, there have been court cases that struck down some of those laws in various states. The link you posted is current laws, not past laws. But right from that site:

July 5, 1993, marital rape became a crime in all 50 states, in at least one section of the sexual offense codes, usually regarding force. May 2005! New stars: AZ/VA. 30 states still have some exemptions from prosecution for rape, e.g. when the husband does not need to use force because the wife is most vulnerable (temporarily or permanently, physically or mentally legally unable to consent)! Such marital privileges are also extended to unmarried cohabitants who sexually attack their partners in CT, DE, IA, MN & WV.
Click to expand...
 
Dragonfly said:
Just because something might be difficult to prove doesn't mean it should be swept under the rug and ignored.

There are adults coming forward and accusing priests of molestation and rape that happened decades ago.

Should those cases be ignored because "they're difficult to prove"?
Click to expand...
No one's talking about ignoring it.
 
roguenuke said:
I already linked the story and there are many more confirming that this was where the argument he was making originated from. If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it. But mine has already been given. And it was not refuted. There was even a press statement made from Blacks people that said he wasn't taking a position at that time. What else was he making the comment on if not a repeal of such a law? Go ahead, you do the research.
Click to expand...
You linked to a story (which is where I got that video from). That's not evidence.

Here's an example of evidence:
STATE LAW CHART
Marital / Spousal Rape Laws and Penalties | Criminal Law
 
Last edited:
Goshin said:
Yeah, hot is nice but I tend to avoid crazy.
Click to expand...

LaMidRighter said:
Every time, I would rather an average lady who makes me happy over a gorgeous psychopath. Then to come back to topic, I've heard the latest craze is rape play, I don't like that idea because it could have a chilling affect on actual rape cases.
Click to expand...

You kind of have to wonder if her fetish didn't really revolve around getting her lovers falsely accused of murder. Any guy unfortunate enough to have the gun in question go off during the act would be royally screwed.

Good luck explaining an accident like that to the cops! :lol:
 
Gathomas88 said:
You kind of have to wonder if her fetish didn't really revolve around getting her lovers falsely accused of murder. Any guy unfortunate enough to have the gun in question go off during the act would be royally screwed.

Good luck explaining an accident like that to the cops! :lol:
Click to expand...
Yep, that was the basic consensus at the end of the story.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I suppose if its an actual physically violent rape -yes...

But at the same time I have been with chicks (girlfriends) who didn't want to have sex for one reason or another but I kinda worked my way into it, and they were just trying to please me, so it was completely consensual..... That probably happens to a lot of couples anyways...

But physically forcing a woman to have sex using brute force (even if it is your wife) is rape in my mind. If you physically have to force a woman to have sex it is certainly rape.
Click to expand...

Why does there have to be physical force? What if the wife is passed out drunk? What if the husband/wife is slipped a date rape drug? What if they are physically incapable of fighting back? What if the husband or wife controls the money and basically uses that control to get the sex? "If you want to sleep in the bed tonight, you have to have sex with me." Would that be merely abuse or abuse and rape? Afterall, if someone were using some other form of coercion, it can be considered rape. Basically, if it is rape between non-married people, it should also count as rape between married people. It wouldn't change the evidence or requirements to convict, "beyond a reasonable doubt", but it would allow for conviction when the evidence is there without having laws preventing that.
 
Jerry said:
You linked to a story (which is where I got that video from). That's not evidence.

Here's an example of evidence:
STATE LAW CHART
Marital / Spousal Rape Laws and Penalties | Criminal Law
Click to expand...

All of which are current laws, and the legislation dealt with past laws, that your site even confirms the ban on prosecution was repealed in 2003. That is proof that there was one. Your own posted site proves it. But the article is evidence that there was an issue up for debate in the general assembly of VA in 2002 dealing with spousal/marital rape and that this representative commented against change to the laws. If you have actual evidence to the contrary that this debate/issue came up as reported by the article, please present it. So far, you haven't provided such evidence. You have done nothing but show that currently those laws are different. Nothing more.
 
roguenuke said:
Why does there have to be physical force? What if the wife is passed out drunk? What if the husband/wife is slipped a date rape drug? What if they are physically incapable of fighting back? What if the husband or wife controls the money and basically uses that control to get the sex? "If you want to sleep in the bed tonight, you have to have sex with me." Would that be merely abuse or abuse and rape? Afterall, if someone were using some other form of coercion, it can be considered rape. Basically, if it is rape between non-married people, it should also count as rape between married people. It wouldn't change the evidence or requirements to convict, "beyond a reasonable doubt", but it would allow for conviction when the evidence is there without having laws preventing that.
Click to expand...


Some of that would be hard to prove, some of it would be hard to prove wasn't consensual, in an atmosphere of assumption-to-consent.

Coercion? As in, "Mow the grass or you don't get any this weekend?" :lamo
 
If violence, threats or coercion are used it is rape no matter who the particpants are. Whether I would convict a husband if I was on jury would depend solely on the evidence and testimony, not on any notion that a husband can't rape a wife or that he is permitted to rape his wife.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom