A British judge has invoked the ire of online commentators, activists and politicians after remarking that it was a man’s “fundamental human right” to have sex with his wife during an already controversial court case.Apparently the husband, wife, and judge see nothing wrong with the marriage, but some social service agency does. How did we get to this point, where govt busybodies actively use the courts to intervene into the most intimate part of a marriage?
“I cannot think of any more obviously fundamental human right than the right of a man to have sex with his wife… I think he is entitled to have it properly argued,” senior High Court judge Justice Hayden was quoted as saying during a preliminary hearing on a case involving a married couple of 20 years.
The wife has learning difficulties and her condition is deteriorating, prompting social services to raise the alarm about the potential for sexual abuse in the relationship as they felt the woman was no longer able to make decisions about whether she consented to sexual relations. Social services ultimately brought the case to the Court of Protection in London.
A legal dictionary defines:
marital rightsThis right is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article on Rights and responsibilities of marriages in the United States. There is a lot of gay stuff instead. Apparently feminists and gays have rewritten marriage law to make it all about receiving govt monetary benefits. Surveys show that young people are less sex than ever.
n. an old-fashioned expression for the rights of a husband (not rights of a wife) to sexual relations with his wife and to control her operation of the household. (See: consortium, loss of consortium)