What if you could never have sex again?

[chromosphere]

"THe first thing every man on here gets told is that they should do things for their wives (meeet their needs) and expect NOTHING in return."

I think you are confusing the main point a bit. You do things for your S out of love, not out an expectation of tit for tat. That is what is ideal for both parties, that sex/affection is not something you are "owed" or is a "duty" or you have to "earn it" by doing various other tasks. This does NOT mean that the love is unconditional though, because if the other person is not doing things out of love for you (not in return for your acts, just out of love), then the R is one-sided and either needs to be fixed or terminated. The idea is that two people mutually do things out of love for each other, no scorecards, no checklists, etc.

Now that of course is the ideal state, and people who are in troubled marriage might have to resort to scorekeeping at some level (scheduled sex for example) in order to break through past resentments, build positive habits, etc., so long as the scorekeeping is TEMPORARY. Of course, every couple is different, and some couples might find that they need scheduling or other similar activities to maintain their R even after it is brought back to a healthy level, and that of course is fine for them if it is mutually agreed upon. Of course, all of this is IMHO.

"Either ALL needs must be unconditional or they are all conditional. And from the christian readings I have been doing, they tend to say that we should meet our spouses needs UNCONDTIONALLY."

I think whoever you are reading is abstracting things to a ridiculous degree, and is probably one of those same people who thinks the world is 6000 years old. Do you honestly expect me to swallow the arguement that my W should want to have sex with me NO MATTER WHAT? The Bible doesn't say that, there are conditions on marital sex. You outta read that Marriage Bed website that NOPkins suggested to me. I've found those two have melded practicality with biblical teaches pretty well.

"Now in the example of this case, the women is saying that she can not have sex with a man that does not love her unconditonally. She is telling him that his interaction with her must be UNCONDITIONAL while her interaction with him is CONDITIONAL."

You are right, the case on this thread is wrong-headed. But you shouldn't go generalizing the specifics of this case to every possible marriage situation. That's what I think has been troubling you for so long CeMar (again IMHO). You are trying to swat a fly with a tennis racket. You end up doing damage to other things in the process, and most of the time the fly slips through the holes in the racket strings. OK, not the best analogy, but I have lab in a few minutes and I'm in a hurry.