16 thoughts on “That IS important. But, I think the woman might have something to say about it too…”

  1. Be careful, Lora’s comment is a logic trap. Those of you who are pro-life, and Christian especially too, but disagree with her above “consent” comment, and whether God is in control, must then be asked why a woman’s consent is not good enough in whether an abortion can or should be performed as well…

    1. Abortion is taking a human life (murder) and that power is not given to individuals by God.

  2. Good grief. I read the article. It is more than rubbish, it is spiritually abusive, potentially dangerous and she needs to clarify if her posting it is a statement of agreement. That type of male dominance and emotional and sexual control over women is the stuff of radical Islam, not Christianity. All the verses cited in the article were twisted to fit a scary view that is a total distortion of the mutuality and censuality of loving marital relations.

    1. Steve, she posts stuff like this all the time. So what? At least she isn’t posting cat pictures and recipes. If this is to deep for you, don’t read it. I find her postings very educational and interesting. Are you only suppose to post stuff you agree with? I post stuff about Muslims. Does that mean I agree with their ideology. I can relate to Lora because she is a critical thinker. You guys are getting a little carried away.

    2. Tara, does a true Christian believe these things about women in marriage? Are you also suggesting you believe this interpretation of Christian marriage to be true? Please clarify your own view and renounce Hubbel in this regard if indeed you feel she is in grave error? This article is saying that any wife who says she has a headache, or who says no to any place and time, is a liar about the headache and in defiance of God who commands her to sexually submit.

      1. Yes I agree with you Steve and I am sure Lora would too. Have you read what she posts about Islam. You wouldn’t label her a Muslim would you? Hubbel and Tapio showed up in Pierre for that inner-faith gathering at the capital. Does that make them Islamphobs and racists? I guess you might want to ask the liberal media and Tanzeea Islam.

      2. Here you go Steve………Lora Hubbel Steve Hickey again is reveling in ridiculing me over this article. Over Semantics. Rape is DEFINED as unlawful sexual activity….which does not apply to your spouse. Forced sex on a spouse is abuse….equally reprehensible…..and should be equally punishable by law. Hickey is using a loose definition of rape….the article is using the medical definition of rape.

  5. My head is spinning and I’m going to defer to Rev. Hickey on the Bible interpretation and focus on the gist I gleaned from the article.

    On one hand we have one element of society which encourages women to speak with their bodies instead of their minds- a blatant objectifying of women as sexual objects for pleasure (sidebar, the red carpet women dressing provocatively in black dresses was beyond ironic). It amazes me how the women’s march women don’t see the disconnect.

    But, on the other hand, you have this article which smells like Warren Jeffs wrote it from prison which is also objectifying women as sexual objects for pleasure (to be clear it is a particular and specific objectification for husbands only but no less offensive and crazy).

    In the end, I see both sides as nothing more than apologists for sexual predators. What incenses me (and I think that is part of what Hickey was saying) is rationalizing predation under the guise of the Prince of Peace is especially offensive.

    Trying to bring humor in to make a point and not make light of the subject: Anyone on here who knows my wife: How do you think it would go over if I told her I could rape her when I want? Or told her I thought she should dress slutty when we go to the movie? Think this would be my last post ever here? Not going there. Wouldn’t be prudent.

Comments are closed.