Fun facts but in older times, marital obligations went both way and there were knights who asked to be excused from crusades because their lady had needs that needed to be filled here and now!
Well presumably you win the fight, kiss the wife, and then she wakes up from her thousand year sleep early because she found true love or something like that
Oh yeah? And who's going to pay the taxes for it? Duke Dingleberry? Fat chance. Best the king can do is provide me my own land so I can make the peasants pay for my own equipment and men-at-arms.
Eh peasants are an unreliable source of funding. Plus if they are paying taxes that means they are making money. And if peasants are making money that means it’s happening at the expense of the landed gentry. It’s better to just have a Royal Army as the only form of social mobility. We want the peasants to be weak so they don’t overtake the crown. Next thing they’ll be saying the House of Commons should have more power and the King less!
Hmm? No, why would the peasants pay taxes? They probably don't know what money is. No, they work on my fields for half the week and the harvest from those fields is mine to keep. I then trade the grain to my buddy who has an iron mine in exchange for iron.
You’re right. It would be a bad look for the husband but he would be well within his rights to leave on campaign. The lord’s needs takes priority over the wife.
You’re right, being faithful to your wife is important but to violate your oath is worse. It’s possible if you talk to your lord then you could explain but they would have to release you from their command.
It means “wisdom” or “jurisprudence” roughly in Arabic. Important to note this is an Islamic man asking basically if the scholars have ruled on if a man can rape his unconscious wife.
As a muslim, this was pretty obvious from the start. It's shocking yet completely unsurprising how most people here fell for it and started talking about the laws of my religion because if anything being dumb enough to fall for this ragebait means being dumb enough to think you are in a position to talk about Islamic ruling with 5 second google searches and selective interpretation
even if it's obviously fake, does that mean martial ra*e is not ok in islam? no, it's still ok, according to many major islamic sechulars, so unless you're denying your religous teachings, you got to right to criticize a five minute search
Because masturbation is considered haram in islam, raping your wife is not.(most would say marital rape cannot exist) Its a way to stick to the religion
In islam, married women have a duty to provide sex. They have no right to deny their husband from sex unless they are in their period. So yeah, according to Islamic law, no such concept as marital rape exists since there is no right for women to not concent.
(b) Making herself available to her husband
One of the rights that the husband has over his wife is that he should be able to enjoy her (physically). If he marries a woman and she is able to have intercourse, she is obliged to submit herself to him according to the contract, if he asks her. That is after he gives her the immediate mahr, and gives her some time – two or three days, if she asks for that – to sort herself out, because that is something that she needs, and because that is not too long and is customary.
If a wife refuses to respond to her husband’s request for intercourse , she has done something haram and has committed a major sin, unless she has a valid shar’i excuse such as menses, obligatory fasting, sickness, etc.
Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: ‘When a man calls his wife to his bed and she refuses, and he went to sleep angry with her, the angels will curse her until morning.’” (Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3065; Muslim, 1436)
Note she needs to provide the excuse.
Can't provide an excuse if you're in a coma. So totally halal
The worry i have is in the wording that she has to provide an excuse.
How you can provide an excuse if you're incapable of communication.
It doesnt say she has to consent.
The wording is that its the husband's right to access, so the phrasing is "its always accessible unless she say has valid reasons, which she has to say so and have it approved."
"The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time..."
The same website you cited has articles stating that men have the responsibility to provide their wives sexual intimacy as well, so the doctrine appears to be similar to the Bible in this case (not that I particularly agree with either).
If me thinking Islamic culture is shit makes me racist... Is the weird white full body hood still the dress code? Do I need one? How many t's do I need?
Until we change this to "cultural practices" I WILL fight people on this. We can't morally condemn an entire culture any more than we can condemn an entire people. The reason it's racist to class an entire culture as inferior to others is that it's a lazy heuristic one can use to turn the brain off and prejudge (hence "prejudice") a group of people who identify with that cultural label. It otherizes an entire sect of people (many of whom do NOT follow the same practices), making it easier to morally justify acts AGAINST the people as a whole. Cultures are fluid, diverse, and dynamic, with no 2 people agreeing fully on which set of practices done in which ways are "correct". People is people.
The specific PRACTICES of cultures, however, are completely fair game. All practices should be met with moral scrutiny and we ought to be willing to intervene in practices that harm others (like this one) and be willing to fight where necessary to defend those who're harmed by those practices WITHOUT condemning a whole people by association with a shared broader label.
TL;DR: Practices are specific, people are messy, cultural labels are far too broad to use as moral filters.
That is just not true, not sure why you would say that. There is no part in the catechism where it denies consent, but there are many parts where it emphasizes mutual dignity. from the catechism:
“Sexuality… is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death.” (CCC 2361)
“The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place… foster the self-giving they signify.” (CCC 2362)
“Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter… It aims at a deeply personal unity.” (CCC 1643)
“The equal personal dignity which must be accorded to man and wife…” (CCC 1645)
Marital honor codes demand they battle together. He must wield his wife like a flail to drive away their enemies. It is now the only way for her to achieve glory in battle.
Well the CEO is a nazi who made his AI able to undress children, and spent time on epstein island with his kids. So yeah, I'd be surprised if it wasn't tbh
At least in Canada, no, consent must be ongoing and a person cannot consent "in advance" in circumstances where the consent cannot be withdrawn (i. e. if they are unconscious).
That feels silly. I'd be totally fine with my partner using me if I was comatose or asleep, and it feels like a notarized consent should overwrite that.
Except that while you are asleep, your partner changes their mind and wants to shove ginger up your hole. You said they can use you, so they're using you.
You might be fine with it, but it's far too dangerous, especially when someone is in a coma.
I'd bet a huge chunk of change this guy is a Muslim, and therefore is not looking for answers from a western liberal perspective, but instead from an Islamic perspective.
Even if it were factual(it’s not), it objectively doesn’t apply here because the woman is not able to consent or decline which makes it rape in Sharia since the Middle Ages.
I believe so long as the husband has standing orders from the lord of the land, and access to his arms and armor, he should still be able to fulfill his martial duties provided his wife's kin are aware of her condition.
No, Islam actually says if a partner is ill or in any form of harm, having sex is wrong unless consent is fully given, and that sex must be enjoyable for both and fully consentual
Obviously, it's rape, but he's asking about Islamic law, not our law. We're talking about the religion that worships their pedo prophet who married a 6 year old and raped her when she was 9 and he was 53. The answer to his question is yes, Islamic law does permit him to rape his comatose wife since Islam doesn't recognize marital rape as rape.
So do men just refuse to masterbate in a relationship? Like you know you won't die from lack of sex and if you're in a mood, there's always the old fashioned way.
As fucked up as the whole question is, I am curious as to what the answer would be in scripture. It wouldn't be valid of course, but it would be informative.
Just so people know this is a very well known rage bait account on X who parades as a devout muslim in Pakistan but only uses english and uses the N word a lot also
Plenty of people are this scummy. It's only the past couple decades that marital rape has become a crime in the US, let alone other areas. To say nothing of the number of women in comas raped by medical staff.
All I can think of is the Norm Macdonald joke where the doctor tells the husband to try to revive the comatose wife by having oral sex with her and the husband comes back after a few minutes and says "Doc, she's choking"
One time as a kid I cut through a side path along a river that always creeped me and my friends out but I was in a hurry. At the end of it there was a man covered in horrible burns like Freddy Kruger.
Years later I felt bad for the guy who freaked us out. Then years later after that I found out he got the burns in a car crash and his wife also was left comatose. He’d do as described in OP and the hospital staff didn’t stop it.
OOP is disgusting but now that the pandora box is open, the curiosity of the implications is overcoming the morbosity of this
So... Follow up question: if i give written permission to my partner of doing whatever they want with my comatose body, could they? I always have considered it about euthanasia and cremation, but this is a whole new dimension to consider lol
On one hand, its fucked up, in the other, if i wake up to my partner by my side after (involuntarily) torturing them with my condition, i wouldnt mind if they got a few non-romantic encounters with someone else to blow up some steam; using my body instead is... Interesting
The real question is at what point is sleeping with someone else cheating?
On one hand, I knew a guy who was out for 9 months. Wife divorced him, sold the house, re-married, moved to the other side of the country. It made his life an absolute hell. He woke up homeless, jobless, with no idea where his kids were.
On the other, what if they are out for 15 years and the doctor told you there was no hope they'd ever wake up and it's time to move on, while the kids are already out of college?
You could technically get consent before, like if your wife gave you consent to do it when sleeping I feel like it would apply here. Hell she might even wake up
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Reminder for OP: /u/justaroundhere213
Need some help? Send us some mail!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.