Contemporaneous Arguments for Keeping the Marriage Exemption

Arguments against striking down the the marital exemption included.[1]

1. It would be difficult to enforce.
2. It would undermine the family.
3. Victims are sufficiently provided under current laws
4. It would lead to a flood of complaints by vindictive wives.
5. The Bible supported the marital exemption.

The current laws that supposedly covered wives were insufficient   A husband could be charged with assault in certain states, but not a sexual assault.  The man could not be charged with the crime he actually committed.   

Starting in the Victorian Era, a judge would often show pity on a raped spouse and grant her a divorce.  Instead of prosecuting the man for his crime, she could throw herself on the mercy of the court.  

Some argued that the invention of No Fault Divorce was sufficient.    A woman could simply divorce her rapist in many states.  On this one, many of the same people that were trying to keep the marriage exemption were trying to rid the nation of No Fault Divorce.  Still the problem remains that a wife must separate herself from her husband and divorce him. She must run instead of find justice.