• 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!

Implied consent in marriage

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
19,894
Reaction score
7,312
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The question before you is, is there an implied consent to sex when a couple enters into marriage. This is intended to be in both directions, so anyone who only takes it in the direct of the woman is trolling, especially since this question also applies to same sex marriages.

Now with this question, comes the understanding that if there is such an implied consent, either party can withdraw it at any time. "not tonight, dear" is a valid withdrawal of consent. "You've pissed me off! It'll be a month before I will want sex with you" is a valid withdrawal of consent.

The question of implied consent is not supposed to indicate that either party can't withdrawal consent, but that neither party needs to seek consent each and every time for each activity. This also assumes that no other specified conditions were agreed upon. Naturally, if one says that the other has to ask prior every time and the other accepts that, sure. But outside of agreed upon conditions, does the implied consent exist?
 
Marital rape simply did not exist as a legal concept in this country until the 1970's.
You could get into a tiny spot of trouble for beating up your wife but if you wanted sex, police and the courts would side with you if you forced the issue.
We don't always live up to our aspirations.
 
The question before you is, is there an implied consent to sex when a couple enters into marriage. This is intended to be in both directions, so anyone who only takes it in the direct of the woman is trolling, especially since this question also applies to same sex marriages.

Now with this question, comes the understanding that if there is such an implied consent, either party can withdraw it at any time. "not tonight, dear" is a valid withdrawal of consent. "You've pissed me off! It'll be a month before I will want sex with you" is a valid withdrawal of consent.

The question of implied consent is not supposed to indicate that either party can't withdrawal consent, but that neither party needs to seek consent each and every time for each activity. This also assumes that no other specified conditions were agreed upon. Naturally, if one says that the other has to ask prior every time and the other accepts that, sure. But outside of agreed upon conditions, does the implied consent exist?
No.
 
No, you (general you) aren't entitled to have sex with your spouse if they don't consent. If they say stop and you keep going, it's rape.
Absolutely true. There is no guarantee of sex with anyone, even your spouse. They can say no at any time and for any reason. Refusal to respect that decision is sexual assault or rape.
 
The question before you is, is there an implied consent to sex when a couple enters into marriage.

No, I would go so far as to say implied consent is a made up legal term that for this subject is an argument for misogynistic attitudes.
 
Marriage, according to the church means you're ****ed if you do and you're ****ed if you don't.

In the context of marriage, consummation means the actualization of marriage. It is the first act of sexual intercourse after marriage between a husband and wife. Consummation is particularly relevant under canon law, where failure to consummate a marriage is a ground for divorce or an annulment.
 
No, you (general you) aren't entitled to have sex with your spouse if they don't consent. If they say stop and you keep going, it's rape.
How did I know I would have at least one responder who didn't read the whole post. Go back and try again.
 
Marital rape simply did not exist as a legal concept in this country until the 1970's.
You could get into a tiny spot of trouble for beating up your wife but if you wanted sex, police and the courts would side with you if you forced the issue.
We don't always live up to our aspirations.
I'm all for marital rape to be a thing as far as something that one can be charged with. And I even specifically noted that either spouse could withdrawal their consent. The question before us is not does marriage make consent obsolete (meaning that "no" gets ignore)? It whether there is an implied consent such that consent doesn't have to be asked for but can still be removed/withdrawn?
 
Absolutely true. There is no guarantee of sex with anyone, even your spouse. They can say no at any time and for any reason. Refusal to respect that decision is sexual assault or rape.
So did you miss where I said almost exactly that in the OP?
 
How did I know I would have at least one responder who didn't read the whole post. Go back and try again.
The question of implied consent is not supposed to indicate that either party can't withdrawal consent, but that neither party needs to seek consent each and every time for each activity.


Every act of sex needs consent individually. Just because you had sex 8 hours ago or the day before doesn't in any way suggest that no consent is necessary or that the partner cannot refuse.

So one is required to ask the spouse each and every time before trying to engage in sex?
Yes., Absolutely correct. Every time.
 
So one is required to ask the spouse each and every time before trying to engage in sex?
Whut?

Can you not tell when your partner is "in the mood"? Do you not communicate well enough to make that a nonverbal interaction?

That's just sad.
 
No, I would go so far as to say implied consent is a made up legal term that for this subject is an argument for misogynistic attitudes.
And here we go ladies and gentlemen! The first to assume that it will always be a man imposing on the wife, and never a wife on a husband or one upon the other in a same sex marriage. I guess they believe that such things never happen. I even predicted this in the second sentence of the OP.
 
So one is required to ask the spouse each and every time before trying to engage in sex?

I guess my question would be how is one trying to engage in sex? To me, that requires a 'can we', 'you want to' , or something along that line. So yes, consent needs to be given.
 
Marriage, according to the church means you're ****ed if you do and you're ****ed if you don't.
While I am all for noting the different forms of marriage (legal, religious, social), in this context we are only focusing on the legal, which has no requirement for sex. IOW, legally a marriage is a marriage whether sex happens or not. Even within the specific context of the marriage, the implied consent is there (assuming it exists) whether that consent is used or not. We're exploring whether or not it exists.
 
No. Of course there has to be consent.
Of course there does. I said as much especially when noting that it can be withdrawn. The question is, is that consent now implied or assumed, meaning neither has to specifically ask the other every time, with the ability to withdraw it still present?
 
And here we go ladies and gentlemen! The first to assume that it will always be a man imposing on the wife, and never a wife on a husband or one upon the other in a same sex marriage. I guess they believe that such things never happen. I even predicted this in the second sentence of the OP.

So, by the numbers how often is this happening either way? More importantly who dreamed up the concept in the first place? (Hint, it was not women.)
 
And here we go ladies and gentlemen! The first to assume that it will always be a man imposing on the wife, and never a wife on a husband or one upon the other in a same sex marriage. I guess they believe that such things never happen. I even predicted this in the second sentence of the OP.
I can tell when he is in the mood, just as him with me, and he is more than capable of saying no, either verbally or non-verbally, that I respect. That respect and understanding is the basis of any decent relationship.


How could it possibly be otherwise?
 
The question before you is, is there an implied consent to sex when a couple enters into marriage. This is intended to be in both directions, so anyone who only takes it in the direct of the woman is trolling, especially since this question also applies to same sex marriages.

Now with this question, comes the understanding that if there is such an implied consent, either party can withdraw it at any time. "not tonight, dear" is a valid withdrawal of consent. "You've pissed me off! It'll be a month before I will want sex with you" is a valid withdrawal of consent.

The question of implied consent is not supposed to indicate that either party can't withdrawal consent, but that neither party needs to seek consent each and every time for each activity. This also assumes that no other specified conditions were agreed upon. Naturally, if one says that the other has to ask prior every time and the other accepts that, sure. But outside of agreed upon conditions, does the implied consent exist?

Well short answer?

You have the "implied consent" to TRY.

However, if either Party says "no, not tonight," then no you cannot just go ahead anyway.

Caveat: If there is a history of "games" i.e. "playing coy," then perhaps a question of right may arise.

But IMO better safe than sorry and let the other person voluntarily "change their mind" before proceeding.
 
Last edited:
Of course there does. I said as much especially when noting that it can be withdrawn. The question is, is that consent now implied or assumed, meaning neither has to specifically ask the other every time, with the ability to withdraw it still present?

No, its not implied.
 
I guess my question would be how is one trying to engage in sex? To me, that requires a 'can we', 'you want to' , or something along that line. So yes, consent needs to be given.
A raised eyebrow, a smile, and a nod?
 
Back
Top Bottom