Adultery...

[Viv]

Do you consider adultery to be a sin?

What are your views about being unfaithful, even in unmarried relationships? This has relevance because so many people now live together in preference to marriage and in a similar state of commitment.

Church attendance has declined in the UK. Is there a correlation between the two, or is society simply becoming more tolerant of changing relationships?

Divorce rates generally have increased dramatically over the past 25 years, although UK 2006 stats show a drop. It is difficult to obtain accurate statistics regarding adultery due to the secrecy surrounding the subject:

One in five men and women divorcing in 2006 had a previous marriage ending in divorce. This proportion has doubled in 25 years. In 1981 just over one in ten men and women divorcing had a previous marriage ending in divorce.

Between 2005 and 2006, the number of divorces granted in the UK fell by 4.5 per cent to 148,141, from 155,052. This is the second consecutive drop in the number of UK divorces and the lowest number since 1977. The figure is 18 per cent lower than the highest number of divorces, which peaked in 1993 (180,01.
The number of divorces in England and Wales fell by 6.5 per cent to 132,562 in 2006, accounting for the fall in the UK overall. Conversely, divorces in both Scotland (13,014) and Northern Ireland (2,565) increased in 2006 by 19 per cent and 9 per cent respectively.
Sources: Office for National Statistics; General Register Office for Scotland; Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. National Statistics Online

Personal view, I am liberal in this respect. It is not always a straightforward decision and no one can, or has the right to judge the situation of another.

As an atheist, religion does not enter the equation, although morality does and I accept that it is wrong to be dishonest.

However, there are many aspects to relationships. All's fair in love and war...if you're not happy, move on without animosity.

Of course I say this, because I have treated many men very badly...:p;)

I posted this in topic already in a forum where posters are predominantly U.S. based, it will be interesting to note if the response here varies due to cultural differences...

[LARKIN32]

Do you consider adultery to be a sin?

What are your views about being unfaithful, even in unmarried relationships? This has relevance because so many people now live together in preference to marriage and in a similar state of commitment.

Church attendance has declined in the UK. Is there a correlation between the two, or is society simply becoming more tolerant of changing relationships?

Divorce rates generally have increased dramatically over the past 25 years, although UK 2006 stats show a drop. It is difficult to obtain accurate statistics regarding adultery due to the secrecy surrounding the subject:



Personal view, I am liberal in this respect. It is not always a straightforward decision and no one can, or has the right to judge the situation of another.

As an atheist, religion does not enter the equation, although morality does and I accept that it is wrong to be dishonest.

However, there are many aspects to relationships. All's fair in love and war...if you're not happy, move on without animosity.

Of course I say this, because I have treated many men very badly...:p;)

I posted this in topic already in a forum where posters are predominantly U.S. based, it will be interesting to note if the response here varies due to cultural differences...
is your question about religion?
or society?,whatever that may be.
and yeh being 'unfaithful',in a relationship is not a very good thing,.whether its a sin by whoever standards i dont know...
and why have you treat men very badly?

[Gareth]

Marriage is a legal contract, therefore there should be serious implications for those who violate that contract in the form of prison sentences in my opinion anyway. Even in a secular approach this is how it should be dealt with. Marriage is meant to be difficult to enter to make sure you have the right person first, if one violates the term of marriage there should be a means of divorce, and a jail sentence for the one who is caught. However it's very difficult to prove.

You tell who you are with, before you move onto another person. Otherwise it's just sneaky. It should be on the same level as belligamy which is an illegal offence.

[LARKIN32]

Marriage is a legal contract, therefore there should be serious implications for those who violate that contract in the form of prison sentences in my opinion anyway. Even in a secular approach this is how it should be dealt with. Marriage is meant to be difficult to enter to make sure you have the right person first, if one violates the term of marriage there should be a means of divorce, and a jail sentence for the one who is caught. However it's very difficult to prove.

You tell who you are with, before you move onto another person. Otherwise it's just sneaky. It should be on the same level as belligamy which is an illegal offence.
sounds like christian (?) sharia law...no?

[Gareth]

If you violate a legal contract in relation to business transactions you can recieve jail terms. That is the way it should be in relation to marriage also.

[LARKIN32]

who made up that idea....?
the state or the church...?

[Gareth]

The State in relation to business transactions. I don't see why they don't apply it to all legal contracts.

[Enver]

Marriage is a legal contract, therefore there should be serious implications for those who violate that contract in the form of prison sentences in my opinion anyway.

You joker man. :D

[Enver]

I believe in free love; people should be free to have relationships with whomever they wish.

[Gareth]

Yes, they can have relationships, but if you enter a legal contract you must terminate it legally first. Otherwise it should be illegal and they should enter the system for going against the law it's that simple.

[Viv]

is your question about religion?
or society?,whatever that may be.
and yeh being 'unfaithful',in a relationship is not a very good thing,.whether its a sin by whoever standards i dont know...
and why have you treat men very badly?

The question related to unfaithfulness and how you view it. Opinion is coloured by both religion and societal norms.

Is it a sin by your standards?

Many men are basically dishonest and do not meet my high standard of personal ethics and respect within a relationship. Plus I have a short attention span.:D

[Gareth]

Many men are basically dishonest and do not meet my high standard of personal ethics and respect within a relationship. Plus I have a short attention span.:D

Aha, that's why legislation like this needs to exist. There are plenty of dishonest women though :p

Bear in mind adultery generally (unless a homosexual relationship) takes a man and a woman.

[Viv]

I believe in free love; people should be free to have relationships with whomever they wish.

Lol....in your dreams Enver...:D

[Viv]

Yes, they can have relationships, but if you enter a legal contract you must terminate it legally first. Otherwise it should be illegal and they should enter the system for going against the law it's that simple.

Unenforceable...half the country would be in custody...

[Gareth]

Unenforceable...half the country would be in custody...

Hm, indeed. But then again, that is up to the State to decide whether marriage is a legal contract or not. There should be legal redress of marriage as there is for belligamy.

If it is made illegal people should be more cautious about it and leave their relationships properly before moving on. Even without the legislation it is only manners.

This everything goes nonsense is the reason why I feel morality is going down the swally in this country really. It's just a feeling it's not universal or anything.

Edit: a changeover period of a year or so could perhaps facilitate it.

[Viv]

Hm, indeed. But then again, that is up to the State to decide whether marriage is a legal contract or not. There should be legal redress of marriage as there is for belligamy.

If it is made illegal people should be more cautious about it and leave their relationships properly before moving on. Even without the legislation it is only manners.

This everything goes nonsense is the reason why I feel morality is going down the swally in this country really. It's just a feeling it's not universal or anything.

Edit: a changeover period of a year or so could perhaps facilitate it.

LMAO...going down the swally?? :D Good phrase...
What is belligamy, poligamy?

I think most people would prefer to do things the polite way as you say, but how can you legislate for emotions? Rational thinking is sometimes not in the picture,you are assuming people are master of their own fate and that they are in control.

It's all about passion..not cold legality IMO. If people get to that stage, they do not care what they are supposed to do. They are doing what they must, to be happy and it is outwith the control of logic.

Would law impact on that? Divorce has increased because that did not work, people were very unhappy trying to live that way.

[LARKIN32]

The question related to unfaithfulness and how you view it. Opinion is coloured by both religion and societal norms.

Is it a sin by your standards?

Many men are basically dishonest and do not meet my high standard of personal ethics and respect within a relationship. Plus I have a short attention span.:D

by my standards,maybe it is.

[Gareth]

It's all about passion..not cold legality IMO. If people get to that stage, they do not care what they are supposed to do. They are doing what they must, to be happy and it is outwith the control of logic.

Would law impact on that? Divorce has increased because that did not work, people were very unhappy trying to live that way.


I'm sure some business men have a passion for money :p
Passion doesn't deal in courtrooms. If you don't have consideration for other peoples emotions, that should be seen in that respect surely?

As the old saying goes, "Do onto others as you would do onto you" This is the Golden Rule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule) in many faiths. Selfishness has no place in society, is one persons happiness worth more than the other?

Oh as for not caring what they should do: They should care, and it should be their responsibility to care and act appropriately. Again this anything goes nonsense is ridiculous.

[An Céachta Dearg]

I think it is morally wrong. If one has fallen in love with someone in a relationship then they wouldn't even consider committing adultery. If they do they are clearly not in love with the person they are in the relationship with and clearly have no respect for either the person their committing the at with or for their supposed partner.

One point I've found interesting is the one that Gareth raised in regards to marriage being a Legal contract in the same manner that a business contract is. I must say the more I think of your point the more sense it makes.

[Don melQuiades]

Marriage is a legal contract, therefore there should be serious implications for those who violate that contract in the form of prison sentences in my opinion anyway. Even in a secular approach this is how it should be dealt with. Marriage is meant to be difficult to enter to make sure you have the right person first, if one violates the term of marriage there should be a means of divorce, and a jail sentence for the one who is caught. However it's very difficult to prove.


Noooo way dude.

Marriage is indeed a legal contract, but what it is not is a legal contract in sexual terms. It does not legally bind you to not having sex with other people, and it does not legally obligate you to have sex with your spouse.

Marriage, legally, has nothing whatsoever to do with sex, love, or anything of the sort. Nor should it.

[Gareth]

Marriage has everything to do with love. It's a contract to be monogamous for the period you are married. If you fail to do this there should be serious concequences.

[bay]

Yes, marriage is a legal, binding contract between two people. Is adultery immoral, again, I see so many shades of gray here. In a perfect world, two people who love each other and are there for each other physically and emotionally won't need to stray. If one does, then you better examine the relationship becuase something is missing. Nine times out of ten, adultery isn't just about sex, it's about positive attention.

I think maybe even worse than adultery is neglect. Whether you are a woman or a man, being rejected in bed night after night is just as morally wrong.

In too many ways, people in relationships use sex as a weapon to hurt each other. Whether it's withholding it, fooling around with someone else, forcing it on the other, etc.

Not sure tho how you legislate morallity. Religions and governments have tried since there were more than two people on this earth.

I cannot control what someone else does. i can only live my life in such a way that I am not purposely doing harm to anyone I love.

[Gareth]

Eh, if you want to leave your partner, you terminate the contract first. You don't breach it and conspire to hurt the others feelings.

[bay]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eh, if you want to leave your partner, you terminate the contract first. You don't breach it and conspire to hurt the others feelings.

I do agree with that. I've always been of the mind that two wrongs don't make a right.

[miriya]

it no bodies bussines but the people involved

[Gareth]

it no bodies bussines but the people involved

And the one being cheated on should have no power in getting justice?

[bay]

define justice in this instance gareth? Just how does one get justice for infidelity?

[Enver]

And the one being cheated on should have no power in getting justice?

No, why should they?

[Gareth]

Well, there is a lot of hurt done by this. It is a legal and written contract like any other. And in any sense it causes pain, and has in the past led to psychological difficulties, suicide, and other things that people fail to take into account. So yes, people like this should be taken seriously.

[bay]

gareth i agree with you that it is a serious issue. My question is how can this ever be set right? Getting even is simply adding a wrong to a wrong and that doesn't make a right.

Is there ever a case in which it's ok for someone to seek physical love somewhere else? What if the couple has gone 10 years sexless and it's not a mutally agreed thing to have a sexless relationship? would it be ok then for the neglected party to find some attention?

just asking.

[Don melQuiades]

Marriage has everything to do with love. It's a contract to be monogamous for the period you are married. If you fail to do this there should be serious concequences.

Have you ever heard of spousal rape?

As far as the law is concerned, love is not important in marriage. It is not a promise to have sex, nor a promise to refrain from extramarital sex. I challenge you to find a law, at least in the United States, that proves me wrong.

Some people consider anal sex, oral sex, or dancing a serious sin. There have even been laws made against all of those. In the United States, at least, thankfully, those laws have fallen or are in the process of falling by the wayside, because it is none of the state's business.

I am perfectly willing to discuss the morality/immorality of adultery, but I'd like to clarify this point before proceeding.

[bay]

the question is adultery, which implies sex. You are right, the law doesn't imply love in a marriage, at least not the civil law. But when we are talking about morality, immorality, justice for the injured party, the implication is that that at some point there was love involved or there would be no hurt associated with the adulteruous act.

[LARKIN32]

gareth i agree with you that it is a serious issue. My question is how can this ever be set right? Getting even is simply adding a wrong to a wrong and that doesn't make a right.

Is there ever a case in which it's ok for someone to seek physical love somewhere else? What if the couple has gone 10 years sexless and it's not a mutally agreed thing to have a sexless relationship? would it be ok then for the neglected party to find some attention?

just asking.why?

[bay]

just giving a hypothetical situation and asking if adultery is ever justified. am not the adulterous type myself, just asking

[Viv]

just giving a hypothetical situation and asking if adultery is ever justified. am not the adulterous type myself, just asking

Anyone who does without sex for ten years deserves to have sex with ten partners if she/he wants...give me a break. That is well above and beyond the call of duty IMO...

[bay]

ROTFLMAO... then she better get started, hahahaha

[miriya]

if marrige is just a contract, why should sleeping around be bad?

anything that happens betwen me and mywife and what we do, is betwen us

[Viv]

if marrige is just a contract, why should sleeping around be bad?

anything that happens betwen me and mywife and what we do, is betwen us

Totally agree. Nobody's business but theirs.

[Don melQuiades]

the question is adultery, which implies sex. You are right, the law doesn't imply love in a marriage, at least not the civil law. But when we are talking about morality, immorality, justice for the injured party, the implication is that that at some point there was love involved or there would be no hurt associated with the adulteruous act.

Morality and immorality have little play in the law.

If you believe in the concept of sin, I suspect that you may already believe in some sort of cosmic justice system already in place, outside of the law. If not, then I doubt that you are the type that wants to see people punished (by the state) for busy dick syndrome in the first place.

[Viv]

Morality and immorality have little play in the law.

If you believe in the concept of sin, I suspect that you may already believe in some sort of cosmic justice system already in place, outside of the law. If not, then I doubt that you are the type that wants to see people punished (by the state) for busy dick syndrome in the first place.

ROFL...hahhh....busy dick syndrome??...heheehhhhh

[bay]

yes I do believe in karma..

[Gareth]

Have you ever heard of spousal rape?

As far as the law is concerned, love is not important in marriage. It is not a promise to have sex, nor a promise to refrain from extramarital sex. I challenge you to find a law, at least in the United States, that proves me wrong.

Some people consider anal sex, oral sex, or dancing a serious sin. There have even been laws made against all of those. In the United States, at least, thankfully, those laws have fallen or are in the process of falling by the wayside, because it is none of the state's business.

I am perfectly willing to discuss the morality/immorality of adultery, but I'd like to clarify this point before proceeding.

Then these laws should be corrected in my opinion. Adultery is not acceptable practice. As for the United States, arguably not the best starting point for discussion, as I'm not fully acquainted with US law.

gareth i agree with you that it is a serious issue. My question is how can this ever be set right? Getting even is simply adding a wrong to a wrong and that doesn't make a right.

Is there ever a case in which it's ok for someone to seek physical love somewhere else? What if the couple has gone 10 years sexless and it's not a mutally agreed thing to have a sexless relationship? would it be ok then for the neglected party to find some attention?

just asking.

Marriage is about more than sex. If you wish for attention, you discuss it with your partner, you do not engage in adulterous practices.

[bay]

Marriage is about more than sex. If you wish for attention, you discuss it with your partner, you do not engage in adulterous practices.

well duh, gareth it's a no brainer that marriage is about more than sex. But without touching and tenderness, the relationship dies. if one person simply refuses to discuss the issue what are the alternatives? live with the status quo or break the contract in some way.

[Gareth]

well duh, gareth it's a no brainer that marriage is about more than sex. But without touching and tenderness, the relationship dies. if one person simply refuses to discuss the issue what are the alternatives? live with the status quo or break the contract in some way.

You don't commit adultery ever. You can proceed seeking for a legal termination if you really want, but adultery is not on.

[Don melQuiades]

Then these laws should be corrected in my opinion. Adultery is not acceptable practice. As for the United States, arguably not the best starting point for discussion, as I'm not fully acquainted with US law.



Oh. I didn't notice that you weren't from the states, an oversight on my part. Perhaps you could tell me then whether, in Ireland, marriage is a legal contract that dictates your sexual behaviour?

That is to say, when you are married do you sign a contract promising to either a) have sex with your spouse, and if so in what circumstances is it optional and b) promise not to have sex with anybody else?

[An Céachta Dearg]

Oh. I didn't notice that you weren't from the states, an oversight on my part. Perhaps you could tell me then whether, in Ireland, marriage is a legal contract that dictates your sexual behaviour?

That is to say, when you are married do you sign a contract promising to either a) have sex with your spouse, and if so in what circumstances is it optional and b) promise not to have sex with anybody else?

"For better or For worse In Sickness and in Health" <--- thats the religious contract side of it. Plus under the Catholic church one can have the marriage anulled if the marriage is not consumated. That is if their is no sexual relations between the couple post marriage or if a offspring is not produced.

In civil law however adultery is recognised as a valid reason for divorce therefore in a way a recognition that it is a violation of the legal contract which was signed when the registry forms were filled in.

Gareths opions do seem a wee bit extreme but when they are compared with the punishment for the violation of business contracts they do hold up.

[Don melQuiades]

"For better or For worse In Sickness and in Health" <--- thats the religious contract side of it. Plus under the Catholic church one can have the marriage anulled if the marriage is not consumated. That is if their is no sexual relations between the couple post marriage or if a offspring is not produced. Which is a bit of a different issue, religion and all. :)



In civil law however adultery is recognised as a valid reason for divorce therefore in a way a recognition that it is a violation of the legal contract which was signed when the registry forms were filled in.

Gareths opions do seem a wee bit extreme but when they are compared with the punishment for the violation of business contracts they do hold up.

Grounds for divorce, yes, but jail time! :eek:

[An Céachta Dearg]

Which is a bit of a different issue, religion and all. :)




Grounds for divorce, yes, but jail time! :eek:

Its a bit dramatic. But then so is doing prison for stealing a snickers bar!!

[bay]

am really glad Gareth is not God and not judging us!

[Viv]

I don't get it. You make a contract in good faith, yes. To say you should be jailed or even punished for breaking it carries many problems...

For example, have both parties fulfilled the terms of the contract?

What are the terms? What should both parties be doing to fulfill that?

Marriage ceremonies state things like..you will consider the interests of the other party before your own and before making any decisions of importance...you will love and cherish...

How you going to verify these conditions have been met?

Face it Gareth, most women marry and expect the fun to start, to be interactive and loving in a relationship and to spend time and share their interest with that partner.

Men marry and expect to park in a chair and watch sport. To be left in peace, that is their expectation.

Women will generally contribute a great deal to a relationship...men wait and take what they get, they are not proactive. 90% of men could be sued for contributing nothing regarding loving and cherishing...:p...IMHO most marriages split up the second the woman stops doing all the work, or the second she has some idea of having any needs of her own...

[Gareth]

Adultery is far more serious than stealing a snickers bar. However theft is also detestable.

The terms are outlined in the marriage agreements that you sign up on the register to. Also, it is a life long contract, unless you terminate it first. If you are unhappy in a marriage, why not seek termination instead of adultery?

Oh and you cannot have an interactive relationship without adultery? When did I say that one should not have an interactive relationship.

Generalizing about men again Viv.... :rolleyes:

bayrab: It just seems that people in general don't care about the party who is going to be seriously hurt, even to the extent of suicides in some cases after adultery.

[bay]

the original question was: Is it sinful to be unfaithful in a relationship. I think we've strayed far from the OT.

IMHO, is it wrong? depends on the situation. Is it a sin? if you subscribe to judeo christian values, yes. Is it against the law and should the perpetrator be punished? that wasn't part of the poll question.

We talked a lot about marriage contracts, but the question wasn't about marriage, it was a bout a relationship which could be a gay relationship, a live in relationship, marriage, or just bf/gf. So there's too many variables to have a blanket yes or no answer.

[donquixote99]

OK. Start with the sociobiology. Those who behave in ways that enhance the survival and further reproduction of their genes are the ones most represented in subsequent generations. For this reason, we wind up with certain instincts, that motivate us as follows:

1. For a man to invest big time and effort in raising kids, he wants it to be likely they are actually his. So, he wants the woman to be loyal in the relationship.

2. A man loses little, OTOH, by fathering kids far and wide (unless his committed relationship woman finds out). So guys tend to be in wild oats mode, especially if they aren't in a relationship.

3. A woman knows her genes are in her kids, so what she wants is to maximize male participation in their upkeep and development. She therefore wants a man who is committed to her, and not fathering bastards that may suck off some benefits from her kids. She will in fact try to avoid having kids without a committed male available. But having kids without such a male is better than not reproducing at all.

4. However, if a woman is in a committed relationship with a man who will participate in raising the offspring, it's in her interest to get more and possibly better genes into the family from other males (unless her committed male finds out and deserts her) BTW, the kinds of man who makes a reliable committed father is different from the type that fathers a son who will someday spread her genes far and wide. This is why some women feel an urge to cheat with 'bad' men they would not prefer for a relationship.

Also, the potential to spread genes far and wide is why male children are preferred over female by both sexes.

The bottom line is both males and females have reason to seek committed relationships in which their partner is sexually loyal. Both have reason to cheat, though, but secretly, because their partner will be pissed if they find out.

One clause of the basic marriage contract is "I won't cheat on you if you won't cheat on me."

The general ethical question is always "Is it wrong to cheat if you won't get caught?" The evidence seems to suggest our genes don't think so.

[Viv]

Gareth: Just tellin it like it is...:p

Don...pretty interesting post. What is it based on? Any links...?

OK. Start with the sociobiology. Those who behave in ways that enhance the survival and further reproduction of their genes are the ones most represented in subsequent generations. For this reason, we wind up with certain instincts, that motivate us as follows:

1. For a man to invest big time and effort in raising kids, he wants it to be likely they are actually his. So, he wants the woman to be loyal in the relationship.

Seems reasonable.

2. A man loses little, OTOH, by fathering kids far and wide (unless his committed relationship woman finds out). So guys tend to be in wild oats mode, especially if they aren't in a relationship.

Excuse to justify unacceptable behaviour?

3. A woman knows her genes are in her kids, so what she wants is to maximize male participation in their upkeep and development. She therefore wants a man who is committed to her, and not fathering bastards that may suck off some benefits from her kids. She will in fact try to avoid having kids without a committed male available. But having kids without such a male is better than not reproducing at all.

All right.

4. However, if a woman is in a committed relationship with a man who will participate in raising the offspring, it's in her interest to get more and possibly better genes into the family from other males (unless her committed male finds out and deserts her) BTW, the kinds of man who makes a reliable committed father is different from the type that fathers a son who will someday spread her genes far and wide. This is why some women feel an urge to cheat with 'bad' men they would not prefer for a relationship.

I understood it was because bad boys are exciting and unpredictable and it is flattering to be chased by an insistent, dominant male. NB: That kind of male is not appreciated by all females..

Also, the potential to spread genes far and wide is why male children are preferred over female by both sexes.

Nah...they are just easier to live with, quieter in the house. Girls demand attention. ;)

The bottom line is both males and females have reason to seek committed relationships in which their partner is sexually loyal. Both have reason to cheat, though, but secretly, because their partner will be pissed if they find out.

One clause of the basic marriage contract is "I won't cheat on you if you won't cheat on me."

The general ethical question is always "Is it wrong to cheat if you won't get caught?" The evidence seems to suggest our genes don't think so.

Good answer.

[Gareth]

I don't think it has much to do with genes at all. Actually Darwinism should be left in science, it doesn't apply to social issues.

So just wondering, do people think it's acceptable to steal if you don't get caught, appropriate to rape if you don't get caught, appropriate to kill if you don't get caught. If you are to justify something on the basis of "not getting caught" you must apply it in the universal spectrum, by doing this you realise how wrong it actually is.

bayrab: definition of adultery check it out:

extramarital sex that willfully and maliciously interferes with marriage relations; "adultery is often cited as grounds for divorce"

Cheating in ordinary relationships is also wrong.

[Don melQuiades]

Adultery is far more serious than stealing a snickers bar. However theft is also detestable.

The terms are outlined in the marriage agreements that you sign up on the register to. Also, it is a life long contract, unless you terminate it first. If you are unhappy in a marriage, why not seek termination instead of adultery?

In moral terms I don't really have a problem with your argument. In legal terms, however, it is ludicrous.

the original question was: Is it sinful to be unfaithful in a relationship. I think we've strayed far from the OT.

IMHO, is it wrong? depends on the situation. Is it a sin? if you subscribe to judeo christian values, yes. Is it against the law and should the perpetrator be punished? that wasn't part of the poll question.


I think it would be wrong for me to do it. However, I do not presume to judge someone else's evaluation of their own relationship. I've been with someone who was in an exclusive relationship, which ended shortly after the fact. I didn't have anything to do with the break up, I think my participation was more a symptom than a cause of the bad relationship. I've also been with someone who was legally married, but not, if you will, in a relationship.

[An Céachta Dearg]

Adultery is far more serious than stealing a snickers bar. However theft is also detestable.

Yes but you can go to jail for stealing a Snickers bar, however you can't do so for committing aldultery!!

[bay]

extramarital sex that willfully and maliciously interferes with marriage relations; "adultery is often cited as grounds for divorce"


so if it's not willfull and malicioius it's not adultery?????

[Gareth]

Adultery is always willful and malicious, unless a spouse gets raped. Adultery is a malicious act that supports the destruction of a marriage and the destruction of self asteem. Hence why the legal means are more honest and respectworthy.

[bay]

am not condoning adultery gareth, don't get me wrong....

but there's no way to have a split, adulterous or a legal end to a marriage conract without there being pain and hurt.

[An Céachta Dearg]

am not condoning adultery gareth, don't get me wrong....

but there's no way to have a split, adulterous or a legal end to a marriage conract without there being pain and hurt.

No but their is infinitly more hurt when one half of the relationship has humiliated and taken the dignity of the other half by committing aldultery

[Don melQuiades]

Adultery is always willful and malicious, unless a spouse gets raped. Adultery is a malicious act that supports the destruction of a marriage and the destruction of self asteem. Hence why the legal means are more honest and respectworthy.

You sound bitter.

[Viv]

Adultery is always willful and malicious, unless a spouse gets raped. Adultery is a malicious act that supports the destruction of a marriage and the destruction of self asteem. Hence why the legal means are more honest and respectworthy.

I disagree. Some marriages just run out of steam and are cancelled due to lack of interest on both sides.

Often you find both people are already involved elsewhere before a marriage actually splits.

No malice, just people move on.

[bay]

ya know, for some relationships, a real human mistress or lover might be easier to deal with in the other partner than a myriad of other hurts people can inflict on each other. There's alll kinds of ways to hurt each other. cheating is only one. witholding, using sex as a weapon for hurt in any capacity is a knife to the heart. There's financial sabotage, passive aggressive manipulation, physical and mental abuse... the list goes on and on. there's no end to the ways people can find to hurt each other in a relationship.

yet we keep getting in them, hope springs eternal eh?

[Gareth]

I disagree. Some marriages just run out of steam and are cancelled due to lack of interest on both sides.

Often you find both people are already involved elsewhere before a marriage actually splits.

No malice, just people move on.

I've always supported the little guy I guess, and I've always supported the rights of those who get hurt as opposed to the ones who insist on hurting. It's the way I've always been.

Don: I'm not bitter I'm only insisting that proper standards be applied, so that we can save lives in many cases or save many from severe depression and humiliation for much of their lives. This anything goes nonsense ought to be put where it is meant to be. In the bin.

[Viv]

I've always supported the little guy I guess, and I've always supported the rights of those who get hurt as opposed to the ones who insist on hurting. It's the way I've always been.

Don: I'm not bitter I'm only insisting that proper standards be applied, so that we can save lives in many cases or save many from severe depression and humiliation for much of their lives. This anything goes nonsense ought to be put where it is meant to be. In the bin.

That is commendable and in many ways I am with you.

But forcing people into an authoritarian situation where they cannot choose how they live will cause more suicide than it prevents. When the decision is made to walk, nothing can stand in the way of it. When the heart stops loving, it kind of moves into hate...and to be forced to stay in that situation is going to cause violence or illness...

It is sad when relationships run into problems, but when they do, not everyone is ready to just throw up their hands and walk away from a marriage. There is more to be considered.

People will not leave safety to go to something unsure...they have to test the water first for a while to see if the new situation is going to work out for them.

It may be wrong...but it's life.

[Don melQuiades]

I've always supported the little guy I guess, and I've always supported the rights of those who get hurt as opposed to the ones who insist on hurting. It's the way I've always been.

Don: I'm not bitter I'm only insisting that proper standards be applied, so that we can save lives in many cases or save many from severe depression and humiliation for much of their lives. This anything goes nonsense ought to be put where it is meant to be. In the bin.

But who is the state to judge the morality of someone's sexual relations?

And what of a case where a marriage is only in the legal sense, and there is no love?

[miriya]

Does the marrige contact state that one will not have sex with anyoneelse

[bay]

Gareth, a marriage contract does not guarantee either or both parties will act honorably. Nor does a relationship without a contract mean they will not.

If it's in two people to treat each other with dignity and respect, they will do it regardless of the laws of religion or laws of the state. and if they are going to be hateful to each other, that will happen regardless of laws, rules, etc.

[Gareth]

Gareth, a marriage contract does not guarantee either or both parties will act honorably. Nor does a relationship without a contract mean they will not.

If it's in two people to treat each other with dignity and respect, they will do it regardless of the laws of religion or laws of the state. and if they are going to be hateful to each other, that will happen regardless of laws, rules, etc.

Well it seems that they have failed to carry out their role, if one commits adultery behind the others back. Adulterers need to be seen as adulterers and they need to have a means to sort themselves out like anyone else. A short prison sentence of up to a year would be necessary. If it goes unpunished it happens again, and then we have a recurring cycle.

The simple question is: Are we going to accept adultery as acceptable behaviour in our societies? I personally would say I don't accept adultery as acceptable behaviour. Socrates was right to deal with the Sophists about this, about 2400 years ago in Athens, we never learn.

Viv: stopping adulterous behaviour causes suicide really? I don't see how that is a rational or realistic conclusion. Would you like to explain how?

When the heart stops loving, it kind of moves into hate...and to be forced to stay in that situation is going to cause violence or illness...

Adultery is not the means of dealing with this kind of issue ever! This is a cruel thing to do to any other human being. It shows selfishness.

But who is the state to judge the morality of someone's sexual relations?

You've fallen into the anything goes trap again surely?

The State already judge the morality of murder, rape and other felonies. Surely if this was your argument you should have a problem with this? Mind you I never bought into this relative morality thing.

Does the marrige contact state that one will not have sex with anyoneelse

If it doesn't it needs to be changed. Such behaviour should not be encouraged by the State.


It may be wrong...but it's life.

Oh my... Gun crime part of life. I suggest the police should stop doing anything about it. Rape, part of life. Police should do nothing about it. Do you see what this would do if we think this way? A touch chaotic no?

[bay]

Gareth,

I see your point, but you are not seeing mine. I'm not disagreeing with you. IN an ideal world, people don't cheat on each other. I've not cheated in a relationship but I've been the one cheated on and I know how bad it feels. My point is that it's not an ideal world and there's no laws we can pass, no religious tenets we can force on people that will MAKE them behave in the way you see fit.

Does that mean we shouldn't try? It means we should do our best to live our own lives in a morally fit way because after all, thats' all we really can control. We can't make another human being think, feel, or act in a way we want them to. We can't nag, legislate or brow beat them into a certain behavior.

and frankly I don't want a man to be love me and uphold our relationship because some law says he has to. I want him to do it because it's in his heart and soul to do so. Anything less is only an illusion of a loving relationship. And a relationship without love and friendship is something I simply won't have.

[miriya]

If it is a contact them it must say what the people in it must do, everything else is just betwen two people

[Gareth]

Does that mean we shouldn't try? It means we should do our best to live our own lives in a morally fit way because after all, thats' all we really can control. We can't make another human being think, feel, or act in a way we want them to. We can't nag, legislate or brow beat them into a certain behavior.

Haven't the police dealt with issues such as murder? Not that I agree with my eastern counterparts as I disagree with the death penalty, but at least adultery is accepted as a social evil there rather successfully. Why can't the West step to the plate?

[bay]

You're talking apples and oranges gareth... murder and adultery. While sometimes murder follows adultery, the act of having sex with aperson outside your committed relationship is hardly in the same league as murder!

I for one hope the government and do-gooders stay out of my bedroom and private life.

[Gareth]

See why can the State say something on murder and not on adultery? I don't understand this. What is so wrong about protecting people from evil things?

[Don melQuiades]

Does the marrige contact state that one will not have sex with anyoneelse
No.

See why can the State say something on murder and not on adultery? I don't understand this. What is so wrong about protecting people from evil things?
What if I consider peeing on the toilet seat evil? What if I consider calling your wife fat evil?

Adultery and Murder are incomparable. One physically injures, indeed kills, another, the other is only potential emotional damage.

While I agree that Adultery is, in general wrong, I reject out of hand your baseless assertion that it is always wrong, and suggest that it must be judged on a base by base circumstance, and that neither you, nor the government, has the right to judge.

Your draconian measures also would put people in jail for being swingers, or being in an open marriage, or being in a marriage that is only such in the legal sense.

[bay]

Gareth, taking a life is one issue

having sex in or out of a relationship is an entirely different one.

Not everyone sees it as evil. It's incredibly personal between two people. To me, sex is the ultimate gift a man and woman give each other and it's wonderful and beautiful and feels awesome and intensifies your feelings for each other.

I'm sure gay couples feel the same, I just can't speak for them.

that is so very personal gareth, it just doesn't belong in the purvue of government or prying eyes.

you like to talk about faith. then you need to have enough faith in your partner that she will do the right thing, and what goes on with other couples is their business.

[Viv]

=Gareth;2804Well it seems that they have failed to carry out their role, if one commits adultery behind the others back. Adulterers need to be seen as adulterers and they need to have a means to sort themselves out like anyone else. A short prison sentence of up to a year would be necessary. If it goes unpunished it happens again, and then we have a recurring cycle.

The simple question is: Are we going to accept adultery as acceptable behaviour in our societies? I personally would say I don't accept adultery as acceptable behaviour. Socrates was right to deal with the Sophists about this, about 2400 years ago in Athens, we never learn.

LOL...who is going to fund this? Half the country will be in the pokey for adultery and the other half will be living off the state because their partners are in jail and they can't leave the kids to go out and work...the list is too long to detail. I guess you are a liberal...not a realist.

Adultery is not the means of dealing with this kind of issue ever! This is a cruel thing to do to any other human being. It shows selfishness.

You've fallen into the anything goes trap again surely?

Yes, our society has evolved to accept something close to anything goes. Because that works for us better than hitting adulterers with a big stick for being human.

The State already judge the morality of murder, rape and other felonies. Surely if this was your argument you should have a problem with this? Mind you I never bought into this relative morality thing.

If it doesn't it needs to be changed. Such behaviour should not be encouraged by the State.

Those other issues are violent crimes...different from private relationship issues.

Viv: stopping adulterous behaviour causes suicide really? I don't see how that is a rational or realistic conclusion. Would you like to explain how?

Oh my... Gun crime part of life. I suggest the police should stop doing anything about it. Rape, part of life. Police should do nothing about it. Do you see what this would do if we think this way? A touch chaotic no?

Gun crime is completely different, it is a violent crime:rolleyes: Adultery is not criminal.
What is chaotic is forcing people to live in an unhappy situation. If you want to dispute that it causes murder and suicide, google it, you lazy ass.

http://worldagenda.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1022

Rule number 2....;)

[Gareth]

Theres more than emotional damage in a lot of cases.

Viv: If you make a claim like that the onus is on you to facilitate a proof generally.

[Viv]

Theres more than emotional damage in a lot of cases.

Viv: If you make a claim like that the onus is on you to facilitate a proof generally.

There is equal burden of proof...or is this a morally bankrupt statement on my part.

It is common sense. Indisputable. Most murders are committed in domestic settings by people who are known to each other. Force people who hate each other to live together, they are going to crack.

Anyway, I am way too tired to research. But I may come back to you tomorrow...

[Gareth]

Eh, are you forgetting about divorce. Or are you forgetting about the fact that a couple should spend a few years together before marriage to prevent this kind of nonsense.

[bay]

there's a lot of reasons why people stay in marriages that aren't working gareth. there are no easy answers to this question. if there were, couples generations before us would have figured it out!

[donquixote99]

Don...pretty interesting post. What is it based on? Any links...?

Well, that layman's precis of the theory is just based on the bits and pieces of it I have in my head. But here's a more detailed discussion: http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/Homepage/Group/BussLAB/pdffiles/Human%20Mating%20Strategies.pdf

If you scroll to the conclusion at the end you'll find something similar enough to what I wrote.

BTW, it seems I should update my language--it is more current to refer to this sort of thought as 'evolutionary psychology,' rather than 'sociobiology.'


Excuse to justify unacceptable behaviour?

Well, that would be the female viewpoint.... :)

Really, the questions are 'unacceptable to who, and why?' Likewise, why acceptable, apparently, to those doing it? Why does the behavior exist?

I understood it was because bad boys are exciting and unpredictable and it is flattering to be chased by an insistent, dominant male. NB: That kind of male is not appreciated by all females..

I think the emotional reactions you describe--finding individuals exciting, liking their unpredictability, feeling flattered--are exactly the mechanisms by which instincts produce behavior in people. Human instincts manifest as emotional motivations. Obviously, these vary from individual to individual, can be altered by learned conditioning, overcome by willpower, etc. We're talking about the broad pattern here.