Did Dennis Prager Advocate Marital Rape?

 NO.

Trolls who attack Dennis Prager online often say he advocates or advocated marital rape. 

There are two basic possibilities here:

1) Their definition of "rape" is ridiculous and not what most people think of when they see the word.

2) They are bearing false witness. They are libeling Dennis Prager and and lying.

Dennis Prager didn't advocate marital rape. He didn't even defend marital rape. 

The allegation comes from a column or a pair of columns published at the end of 2008. From "When a Woman Isn't in the Mood: Part I":

The subject is one of the most common problems that besets marriages: the wife who is “not in the mood” and the consequently frustrated and hurt husband.

Anyone honest about marriage will recognize that this happens a lot.

A woman who often deprives her husband of her body is guaranteed to injure him and to injure the marriage — no matter what her female friends say, no matter what a sympathetic therapist says, and no matter what her man says.

Emphasis mine.

Of course, there are times when a man must simply refrain from initiating sex out of concern for his wife's physical or emotional condition. And then there are men for whom sex rarely has anything to do with making love or whose frequency of demands are excessive.

See that? Dennis Prager did NOT write that a husband should get sex from his wife each and every time he wants it, whenever he wants it.

Every rational and decent man knows there are times when he should not initiate sex. In a marriage of good communication, a man would either know when those times are or his wife would tell him,

The trolls seem to have missed these parts.

But, to repeat the key point, rejection of sex should happen infrequently. And it should almost never be dependent on mood — see Part II next week.

Infrequent isn't never.

In Part II, I will explain in detail why mood should play little or no role in a woman's determining whether she has sex with her husband.

I conclude Part I with this clarification: Everything written here applies under two conditions: 1. The woman is married to a good man. 2. She wants him to be a happy husband. If either condition is not present, nothing written here matters.

Critics of Dennis Prager didn't wait for the second part. They accused him of supporting marital rape. But he didn't. He didn't say a husband should be able to have sex whether or not the wife consents. He is encouraging wives to consent, and to do so for their own sake as well as their husband's. Countless wives (and unmarried women, for that matter) have thought, "Oh, not now" when their man has started to get sexually affectionate, but then end up having a great time and being happy that they didn't reject him.

Fortunately, someone on a Left-leaning site actually defended Dennis Prager from the charges.

Yosef 52 wrote in "No, Prager is NOT Advocating Marital Rape":

I admire and respect bonddad tremendously for his prescience and insight into financial matters. I loathe and despise Dennis Prager for his neanderthal-like conservatism. So it is odd for me to find myself saying what I'm about to say: Prager did NOT endorse, advocate, defend, support or justify "marital rape".

It's a credit to this person.

Nowhere--NOWHERE--in Prager's article does he imply or suggest that men have the right to FORCE themselves on women...But in all honesty, I cannot accuse Prager of endorsing rape. As much as I can't stand Prager, such an accusation is deeply unjust.

Here's the second column by Dennis Prager, which was printed a week after the first.

In Part I, I made the argument that any woman who is married to a good man and who wants a happy marriage ought to consent to at least some form of sexual relations as much as possible. 

CONSENT.

In Part II, I advance the argument that a wife should do so even when she is not in the mood for sexual relations. I am talking about mood, not about times of emotional distress or illness.

He goes on to give eight reasons why. 

1. If most women wait until they are in the mood before making love with their husband, many women will be waiting a month or more until they next have sex.

True.

4. Thus, in the past generation we have witnessed the demise of the concept of obligation in personal relations. We have been nurtured in a culture of rights, not a culture of obligations. To many women, especially among the best educated, the notion that a woman owes her husband sex seems absurd, if not actually immoral. They have been taught that such a sense of obligation renders her “property.” Of course, the very fact that she can always say “no” -- and that this “no” must be honored -- renders the “property” argument absurd. 

Still not seeing this endorsement of rape people say was there.

Of course, most women never regard it as hypocritical and rightly regard it as admirable when they meet their child’s or parent’s or friend’s needs when they are not in the mood to do so. They do what is right in those cases, rather than what their mood dictates. Why not apply this attitude to sex with one’s husband? Given how important it is to most husbands, isn’t the payoff -- a happier, more communicative, and loving husband and a happier home -- worth it?

Critics will say a man should be a perfect husband no matter what.

8. In the rest of life, not just in marital sex, it is almost always a poor idea to allow feelings or mood to determine one’s behavior. Far wiser is to use behavior to shape one’s feelings. Act happy no matter what your mood and you will feel happier. Act loving and you will feel more loving. Act religious, no matter how deep your religious doubts, and you will feel more religious. Act generous even if you have a selfish nature, and you will end with a more a generous nature. With regard to virtually anything in life that is good for us, if we wait until we are in the mood to do it, we will wait too long.

Again, this is about consenting even though she wasn't in the mood before things started. 

That solution is for a wife who loves her husband -- if she doesn’t love him, mood is not the problem -- to be guided by her mind, not her mood, in deciding whether to deny her husband sex.

See? Still up to her.

Trolls will attack Dennis Prager's appearance. However, even some of the most attractive and good husbands have experienced frequent rejection from a wife. So, Dennis Prager's columns are true and have value regardless of his own appearance or his own relationships.

Dennis Prager's columns were written to offer beneficial marital advice that, if taken, will benefit husbands, wives, and their children. Those who've actually read the columns and still attack them are either ignorant/in denial about the realities of marriage or are malevolent towards marriage.