Pickup Artists Preyed on Drunk Women, Brought Them Home, and Raped Them

[AndaliteBandit]

So stop lying and saying she was passed out. She was not. She was fully conscious. She just lacked the capacity to recall the situation.

Were the three people who testified that she was passed out lying?

[Freese]

Someone earlier said that marriage is basically a license to have sex, but it's not. If your wife or husband does not consent to sex and you penetrate them anyways, then that is rape.

[AndaliteBandit]

Someone earlier said that marriage is basically a license to have sex, but it's not. If your wife or husband does not consent to sex and you penetrate them anyways, then that is rape.

It isn't in all countries, but it certainly is in virtually all first world countries. Perhaps they would be happier living in one of these countries instead..

[Deleted]

Someone earlier said that marriage is basically a license to have sex, but it's not. If your wife or husband does not consent to sex and you penetrate them anyways, then that is rape.

Since this one is hard to grasp:
You have the right to have sex with your spouse, you do not have the right use force.
That is to say, you have an unenforceable right.

[dextersmith]

So rape is an art now?

During Jonas’s August 2016 sentencing for both rapes, District Attorney Lisa Fox asked Judge Fraser for eight years, the maximum that the plea deal carried. She noted that Jonas’s quick guilty pleas were not necessarily because he felt regret, but because he wanted protection from “exposing himself to more [charges].”

As it turns out, Jonas’s DNA swab matched yet another victim in a national DNA database, as Fox discovered at a preliminary hearing. For that case—which, according to Fox, involved alcohol and a college student—Jonas has not been charged.

They'll charge him for this right?

[Polyxo]

Since this one is hard to grasp:
You have the right to have sex with your spouse, you do not have the right use force.
That is to say, you have an unenforceable right.

Nope, you don't have the right to sex with your spouse.

[AndaliteBandit]

You have the right to have sex with your spouse

Can you cite what law protects that right?

[Deleted]

Nope, you don't have the right to sex with your spouse.

the legal parlance here is important, but i'm guessing that is not your forte.

Can you cite what law protects that right?

That would be the marriage laws.
But both of you please follow me now, You having the right to have sex, does not constitute an obligation for the other spouse to comply.
And the initial party does not have the right to use force.
I'm using an example here, Does a person have the right to have an abortion, or a right too an abortion?
if you think those options are the same, you are mistaken.

[AndaliteBandit]

That would be the marriage laws.

Really? Please quote the relevant text of those laws.

[Deleted]

Really? Please quote the relevant text of those laws.

just read the rest of the post.

[AndaliteBandit]

just read the rest of the post.

If your claim has any validity, then you should be able to easily cite a source for that claim. Please quote the relevant text of those "marriage laws."

[Deleted]

Since this one is hard to grasp:
You have the right to have sex with your spouse, you do not have the right use force.
That is to say, you have an unenforceable right.

There is no right to have sex with your spouse in any nation that's well developed.

[dextersmith]

If that is going to be the point of view, then they need to keep those men in jail a lot longer than 8 years. The government should also strike out the words “Correctional Facility” from their system.

They should call it Institute of Mortal Kombat.

[Tijuana]

Pretty in-depth article, but also very graphic.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...rape-ring.html

The result of the trials--

What is the point of this thread?

[Deleted]

If your claim has any validity, then you should be able to easily cite a source for that claim. Please quote the relevant text of those "marriage laws."

Consent is assumed as a basic function of marriage, consent to sex is part of what marriage is.
Marriage confers the right to have sex with your spouse, but it does not confer any right to assault your spouse.
By what means could a spouse force sex that was not wanted without the use of force?
But again, go back to the example i listed, because it is important, There is a clear distinction in having a right, and exercising a right.

- - - Updated - - -

What is the point of this thread?

No the story is this group those rapists belonged to are also rapists by association.
Just like all Muslims are terrorist, and all black people are drug dealers.

pretty much that.

[Polyxo]

Consent is assumed as a basic function of marriage, consent to sex is part of what marriage is.
Marriage confers the right to have sex with your spouse, but it does not confer any right to assault your spouse.
By what means could a spouse force sex that was not wanted without the use of force?
But again, go back to the example i listed, because it is important, There is a clear distinction in having a right, and exercising a right.

- - - Updated - - -





pretty much that.

Uh, no. There is no consent attached to marriage. There is no presumption of consent attached to marriage. Not in the United States.

[AndaliteBandit]

Consent is assumed as a basic function of marriage

Rights are not assumed. Rights are protected by the law in writing.

[Tyrianth]

Consent is assumed as a basic function of marriage, consent to sex is part of what marriage is.
Marriage confers the right to have sex with your spouse, but it does not confer any right to assault your spouse.
By what means could a spouse force sex that was not wanted without the use of force?
But again, go back to the example i listed, because it is important, There is a clear distinction in having a right, and exercising a right.

Consent is assumed as a basic function of marriage, consent to sex is part of what marriage is.

No where in the marriage contract states that.

Marriage confers the right to have sex with your spouse, but it does not confer any right to assault your spouse.

Marriage does not confer anything about sex.

By what means could a spouse force sex that was not wanted without the use of force?

The same way any other rape can be done without force? Threats, drugs, abuse of power?

[Deleted]

Uh, no. There is no consent attached to marriage. There is no presumption of consent attached to marriage. Not in the United States.

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

There is no right to have sex with your spouse in any nation that's well developed.

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

Rights are not assumed. Rights are protected by the law in writing.

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

No where in the marriage contract states that.

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

Marriage does not confer anything about sex.

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

The same way any other rape can be done without force? Threats, drugs, abuse of power?

Three things that are all illegal and qualifies as using 'force' -
And more importantly, please answer this question - This goes for all of you:

Does a person have the right to have an abortion, or a right too an abortion?

[Tyrianth]

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

A marriage that has not been consummated can be what?

Three things that are all illegal and qualifies as using 'force' -
And more importantly, please answer this question - This goes for all of you:

Does a person have the right to have an abortion, or a right too an abortion?

Lol so your argument is that the Catholic church says a marriage is not valid if it's not consummated? Get the fuck out of medieval era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implie...t#Spousal_rape

In many common law jurisdictions, a couple who married were deemed to have given "implied consent" to have sex with each other, a doctrine which barred prosecution of a spouse for rape. This doctrine is now considered obsolete in Western countries.[3]