What does God say about Wifes who STOP ( totally ) having sex with H ?

[taiko]

-------------------

 

I believe that in the situation of a spouse divorcing the other and remarrying, the new marriage is not blessed by God.

 

Then the liberal, on divorce, Christians would say that withholding of sex forever falls under abandonment. And adandonement along with reoccuring adultery being God's allowable reason for divorce.

 

The question then becomes why would God forbid remarriage if He allows divorce for abandonment or adultery?

[Mary3]

Then the liberal, on divorce, Christians would say that withholding of sex forever falls under abandonment. And adandonement along with reoccuring adultery being God's allowable reason for divorce.

 

The question then becomes why would God forbid remarriage if He allows divorce for abandonment or adultery?

 

I found many religions frown on divorce and would go as far to say many felt it was Adultry.

 

( Only going by what I read )

 

I personally feel if you marriage is over then its over if you have done all you could to try and save it.

[taiko]

I found many religions frown on divorce and would go as far to say many felt it was Adultry.

 

( Only going by what I read )

 

I personally feel if you marriage is over then its over if you have done all you could to try and save it.

Religious organizations and some states do. Well it is down to Malta and the Philippines unless you married under Sharia Law which have no divorce. Also adultery and bigamy against their laws now. And all organization deal with humans, so all but the most authoritarian sects leave an "out" to the letter of their Holy Book and/or legal codes. It may be having a Bishop, council or judge declare there was never a marriage in the first place 20 years after the children have been raised because of some psychobabble or religobabble reason. Or it may be as simple as having filing a form with a clerk or having a man declare divorce in public four times because that woman did or did not do whatever.

Edited June 2, 2010 by taiko

[amerikajin]

Okay putting the Bible and God aside for a moment , do you think its right for the wife to completely stop having sex with the husband ?

 

That's not up to me. Each couple has to sort their own messes.

 

If it were me, it would be a problem, but I wouldn't just run off to divorce court or have a fling on the side either - that's just an easy way to solve a complex problem, and it ends up creating more problems.

 

Having said that, these roads often lead to the destination known as infidelity. People like to focus on the infidelity part while ignoring the events that precipitate infidelity, which is nonsense. I don't agree with adultery, but if you're cutting off your husband's supply of affection and completely disregarding his feelings, in my book, that's actually going back on your wedding vows just as much as the actual act of sexual intercourse with another partner is.

 

Then again, some couples somehow deal with not having sex with each other. In any case, couples have to communicate and have an understanding. If they share the same faith then they'll probably use their faith as a guide in determining what the lines of propriety are. In some ways, it's easier for religious couples because the scriptures lay it all out there and they can probably have a common interpretation of what's right and wrong. It's a little more complex when two individuals have their own interpretation of what constitutes morality, and I suspect that this unseen divide, more than the actual act of cheating, is what really drives couples apart.

[NoIDidn't]

Jesus was the One that said that divorce and remarriage was adultery - but for the woman. The woman couldn't ask for a divorce, the man "put her away". If she remarried, she was guilty of adultery - not him. She was "shelved", not free to remarry, in that sense.

 

I think refusing sex is a horrible thing to do when you know or think your spouse is stuck with you for life. But I think a husband would be better knowing she never wants to do it, than to get pity sex. Pity sex hides the real issues.

 

Not having sex has to be mutual. But we are also talking about a time when there was no such thing considered as "marital rape". And, I recently read a statement that was attributed to a Rabbi in the Dark Ages practically. He said something comparing a circumcised man to a non-circ. And basically stated that not pleasing the woman sexually and ejaculating quickly was a sign of "strength". That the non-circ was creating lewd women that desired sex by pleasing her and making her want more. I was shocked but found it funny.

[Mary3]

That's not up to me. Each couple has to sort their own messes.

 

If it were me, it would be a problem, but I wouldn't just run off to divorce court or have a fling on the side either - that's just an easy way to solve a complex problem, and it ends up creating more problems.

 

Having said that, these roads often lead to the destination known as infidelity. People like to focus on the infidelity part while ignoring the events that precipitate infidelity, which is nonsense.

I don't agree with adultery, but if you're cutting off your husband's supply of affection and completely disregarding his feelings, in my book, that's actually going back on your wedding vows just as much as the actual act of sexual intercourse with another partner is.

Then again, some couples somehow deal with not having sex with each other. In any case, couples have to communicate and have an understanding. If they share the same faith then they'll probably use their faith as a guide in determining what the lines of propriety are. In some ways, it's easier for religious couples because the scriptures lay it all out there and they can probably have a common interpretation of what's right and wrong. It's a little more complex when two individuals have their own interpretation of what constitutes morality, and I suspect that this unseen divide, more than the actual act of cheating, is what really drives couples apart.

 

Very powerful Amerikajin..

[Mary3]

Jesus was the One that said that divorce and remarriage was adultery - but for the woman. The woman couldn't ask for a divorce, the man "put her away". If she remarried, she was guilty of adultery - not him. She was "shelved", not free to remarry, in that sense.

 

I think refusing sex is a horrible thing to do when you know or think your spouse is stuck with you for life. But I think a husband would be better knowing she never wants to do it, than to get pity sex. Pity sex hides the real issues.

 

Not having sex has to be mutual. But we are also talking about a time when there was no such thing considered as "marital rape". And, I recently read a statement that was attributed to a Rabbi in the Dark Ages practically. He said something comparing a circumcised man to a non-circ. And basically stated that not pleasing the woman sexually and ejaculating quickly was a sign of "strength". That the non-circ was creating lewd women that desired sex by pleasing her and making her want more. I was shocked but found it funny.

 

You hit the nail on the head.

Mutual. For an agreed amount of time. Say surgery , illness , physical problems/pain.