Trump: Schlafly would want us to "keep up the fight"


Trump’s moving words of tribute to Phyllis Schlafly


Trump has once again proved himself to be a true conservative.


I guess it makes sense for Trump to endorse someone who denied marital rape is a crime.


I truly doubt that Trumpf even knows who Schlafly is…


Part of “keeping up the front” would be exposing Trump and his followers as contrary to American Conservatism.


Pretty certainly he did if he was asked by her family to speak at her funeral. Last March, he called her a “great lady”. So at least he knew back then who she was.

There were a lot of people, including certain types of Republicans, who hated her. But while she tended to the strident, sort of like Ted Cruz does, she was well within what conservatives at least purport to believe. Not being a politician herself, though, she apparently felt free to say things simply and directly, without the weaseling about that so many do.


She didn’t say that. What she said was that being married is a consent to sex. She did, however, except any kind of violence or coercion. In the context she was condemning a feminist excess in which the mere claim of rape in marriage is to be given full credence in the absence of any kind of evidence to support it.


To say that “Being married is a consent to sex” means that you cannot withdraw concent unless you are no longer married. If you always consent to sex in marriage there is no such thing as non consentual sex, or in other words, rape.


Interesting way to think of it, but that’s not what she said.


Not necessarily. Priests speak at funerals, not knowing the person whom they are speaking about. Same for calling someone or some groups of people “great” or “amazing.” It isn’t necessary to know them at all. I can easily call everyone here on CAF “great.” :slight_smile:


So she was denying a certain form of marital rape. Being married isn’t a consent to sex. A woman should still be able to turn down sex with her husband. Am I misunderstanding her point?


What does marriage is a concent to sex mean?


Grab a Bible and start reading.


I got to a bunch of begats lost interest. How about just telling me?


Since the only licit use of the sexual faculty is within marriage, exchanging marital vows with one lifelong partner implies a consent to sexual relations with and only with that spouse. It is not a consent to non-consensual sex or forcible sex. But the very fact of getting married is a de facto consent to have marital relations with this man or this woman and only this man or this woman. It also implies that marital relations will not be unreasonably withheld.


Our beautiful Cathedral Basilica!


Here is what St. Paul says about the husband and wife’s obligations with regard to conjugal relations:

1 Corinthians 7:3-4New International Version (NIV)

3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.


Did you mean Trump?


If sex is unreasonably withheld, the person who is unreasonably withholding sex is morally culpable but the other spouse certainly can’t just rape them because of it.


I don’t think any Catholic moral theologian would dispute that. The fact that being married is an implicit consent to sex is not the same as a permission for forcible sex. The basic Catholic understanding of marriage is that both parties grant each other a right to conjugal relations that should be honored if possible. That’s not a permission to rape. I think St. Paul would have agreed, and he said that the husband gives his wife the rights to his own body and vice-versa.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit