Adultery

It's one the main causes for divorce. It's morally wrong and IMO just all round disgusting. There is no justifacation for it. I don't see why something so horrid like this should remain legal in the planet I live in. IME the only people who tend to not have a problem with adultery not being made illegal are ones who have not been affected by it or experienced by it, or would like to have the possible oppotunity to do it for themselves.

Ban it amirtie?

:bounce:

I agree with you about adultery being scummy and ****, however, I am not sure about making it a legal issue. :-\

Well if other disguting things like stalking, downloading child porn and indecent exposure can be made illegal why not adultery?

government has no jurisdiction in divorce or marriage issues such as that. However, I do think it should be much easier to take the guilty party to the cleaner when they do get a divorce.

On second thought, maybe it should be illegal. I mean, if the government is just overseeing a contractual agreement, which is what a civil marriage is, then aren't you technically breaching your contract when you commit adultery? Isn't that, in itself, illegal?

Breaking a contract isnt really illegal per se. If you break a contract, you arent going to go to jail, but you WILL be left heavily actionable by the other parties involved. Thats why what you said the first time made so much sense.

so instead of "suing" it's "divorce"

Well, divorce in the sense of "K, I'll be taking everything now", but yeah. The person who was cheated on should get to take pretty much everything they brought to the table, as well as anything they aquired since then, plus the majority of the joint items, I would assume.

No, it shouldn't be made illegal. Adultery is fun!

1. It is part of our nature to be adulterous.
2. To be adulterous is to be human.
3.There is no one that can say they havent cheated or thought about it (Exept for those who havent been in a relationship).

1. Killing is a part of our nature
2. To kill is to be human
3. There is nobody who can say that they haven't killed, or at least thought about killing someone
4. Murder should be legal.


except mine didn't have 200 grammatical/spelling errors like yours did. Your argument is disregarded.

It's not so taboo these days to speak of adultery like it's some kind of universal sin. It happens, it sucks, well ****. That's pretty much all.

**** bebop whats with the sudden topic


did you get cheated on or something? its not gonna become a law that you cant cheat on someone so just go on with your life and deal

Ignoring the fact that the idea is batsh!t authoritarian wankery, I can see a few problems:

Where is the cheating line drawn? Some people believe there is such a thing as emotional infidelity, where you're clearly in love with someone else and investing all your energy in them, despite being attatched to someone you care less about but are still bonded with. Does that count? It isn't fun for anyone involved and it's just as good at fulfilling the criteria of "destroying families and friendships."

Flirting? Kissing? What if one partner thinks it's cheating but the other doesn't? Different people have different ideas of what is and is not appropriate behaviour.

What if both people cheat?

Are we talking about mandated sexual monogamy here? What about the happily polyamorous? Would you ban swinging?

De facto couples? Legally bound?

Love and sex is a sh!tty, damaging, cruel game, no f*cking law can fix that. Fool.

By adultery I mean a married person having consented sexual intercourse with someone else other than their spouse. Thats cock in vagina/butthole action, so no kissing wouldnt count. And of course if it's consented between the married couple, say swingers, then its fine by me because its fine for them. And I am aware law can't 'fix' the damage done. It would help. Arresting someone for murder doesnt bring the victim back to life but it's still doing a good thing.
[quote=]**** bebop whats with the sudden topic
Whats with any topic I suppose

[quote]did you get cheated on or something?
I dont think I did.

[quote]its not gonna become a law that you cant cheat on someone so just go on with your life and deal
I doubt its going to become law but that shouldnt prevent me from having an opinion, nazi. But from now on, if you have a problem with something that is ok for everyone else you cant speak about it an should just "get on with your life and deal".

tl; dr.

I'll just assume no one has thought to argue that that same morality which governs that adultery is such a horrible thing never would have thought to assume that forgiveness is another thing that your run-of-the-mill moral farms tend to tell you to do. Marriages fail because there is a lack of comprimise most of the time, and also because it's too easy not to take them seriously when divorce is a fairly simple deal.

Banning adultery will still cause marriages to fail, because even if they get sent to jail or whatever, that is only going to make the problems worse.

This is not to say that I support adultery, but I do believe that I could forgive and move on with the marriage if I had married someone whom I truely loved. A lot of the time, I highly doubt that is the case.

Adultery is wrong and it does ruin relationships but that is not any means to make it illegal.

If you are going to go out and cheat on someone you are involved with you better consider how much you want to be with that person, and you better be ready to accept the consequences of you actions.

Every one had fooled around one time or on another, but you need to keep in mind that your actions could seriously be hurting someone and like I stated before if you are going to cheat think about how much you want to be with your boyfriend, girlfriend…..ect.

I like how bebop says we can all get blown as much as we want no matter what.

Eating isnt cheating, amirite bebop?

I'd rather cheat on my spouse than be bound to a meaningless relationship.

If you want to prevent adultery, then you should try preventing the poor marriages in which the couples no longer love eachother or find eachother attractive, but don't want to admit it to one another. It's often much more complicated than a guy wanting some mo' booty.

All guys want mo' booty.:(

Yeah, but you can usually hold back the urges if you care about your spouse.

Except for when I'm drunk, apparently.

ZOMG ALCOHOL IS BAD FOR MARRIAGE LETS MAKE IT ILLEGAL.

am I the only guy who doesn't flip out over a decent looking girl (or . . . fuggo, for that matter) when he's obliterated?

Define 'morally wrong'. If you take enjoyment to be the only intrinsic good, restricting forms of consensual enjoyment is morally wrong. What is your definition of morality? Is it universal enough for a legal precedent?

No, BJ, when I'm drunk all I want to do is talk to EVERYBODY.

I hate sleazy and horny drunks.

Laws wont prevent it. Laws will give justice to the victimes.

The only way to prevent adultery is to work for your marrige, something people can't be asked to do.

Even if adultery was made illegal, it would be quite difficult to regulate. The cheated spouse would have to know about it, then report it, or someone who knows the couple would have to have noticed...
Besides, there's always a twist to it-
suppose you were in a marriage that was no longer a marriage-you dont even sleep in the same room with your spouse, and are only keeping together for the sake of two young girls and a greencard...
I dont consider that a marriage, so I wouldnt consider an outside relationship an affair. But hey, I'm French--I have a different mentality than most English people do.

Come now. The goal of most of America is to make marriage as unimportant as possible. That's why so many people support gay marriages. Now you're trying to make it more important by making cheating illegal? This is the 21'th century. Honesty and common sense are for squares.

Breaking a promise is only wrong if you accept that there are things more important than personal enjoyment. If you don't believe this, then you have no inhibitions against pursuing that angle.

Maybe we could stone the b!tches too.

I honestly don't think a fair divorce is enough punishment for a person ruining so many lives

I honestly don't think a fair divorce is enough punishment for a person ruining so many lives

y don't think a fair divorce is enough punishment for

dont think a fair divorce is enough

fair divorce

You would prefer an unfair divorce? Think about that, and rephrase it. Unless, of course you are actually saying that an UNfair divorce is in order. If so, I'll be more than happy to show why that is the most retarded thing ever said by anyone ever.

And for any mod that gets ****y over this, I understand if you want to delete the zoom part, but my point still stands.

By fair divorce I meant that custody, house, property is split evenly which compared to many divorce cases is fair. However I did don't think that just because a spouse is receiving half of the house doesnt make up for what the adulterer did.

Generally in america, if you get caught cheating the split isnt 50/50. Some states do have laws that make it so that no matter what you get 50%, but thats what prenups are for. Its a legal conract that sets up how things are split in the event of a split up, and can include sections about infidelity. Really, theres no reason that you should ever get screwed in a divorce unless you're stupid, in which case you deserve it.

Of course if you're stupid enough you'll be unlucky enough to get 50-50. Or if your cheating spouse's lover can afford a better lawyer. Point is even in the unlikely event a cheating spouse gets a fair divorce I think it's still wrong. I was mereley emphasising.

[COLOR="Yellow"]Can i just say that Bebop's morality valus seem completely out of whack to me. Women who get raped for wearing sexy clothes and walking in the dark should get some of the blame and hitting women shouldnt be such a bad thing. But cheating spouses must burn in hell![/COLOR]

Could you quote me where I said women who dress 'sexy' should get blame for rape? For that matter where I said cheating spouses should "burn in hell"? Either you know your making things up or you're just an idiot.

[COLOR="Yellow"]I knew you would say that, looking at your posts i noticed that is how you counter-attack every argument. Maybe you didn't LITERALLY said that exactly word for word, but if you were to read what you write, that is how it comes off. So maybe you should double check what you're actually writing.[/COLOR]

It's my counter for people making up quotes. Tit.

LOL HAY GUYS I DIDNT EXPRESSLY SAY IT, AND IM GOING TO PRETEND THAT TAKING MY ARGUMENT TO ITS LOGICAL LIMITS ISNT PUTTING WORDS INTO MY MOUTH LOL!

Yeah, dont even try with bebop.

So let me get this straight. If I say I dont like adultery it translates as ADULTERERS SHOULD BURN IN HELL and even if I didnt say this it doesnt matter? As for the other 2 statements I was accused of, it was clearly said otherwise in those threads.

There's only one fair answer to adultery.

Huge, extravagent, perfectly planned practical jokes involving everyone you know with huge repercussions. Buckets of paint and huge dildos wrapped in a brick of tinfoil must also be involved.

[quote=Iris]I'd rather cheat on my spouse than be bound to a meaningless relationship.

This is unfortunately one of the dumbest things I've ever read, considering who it's from.

So you think the only choices you have when you're in a bad relationship is to screw yourself over or betray and scar someone for life? Try just plain ol' leaving them, jacka[COLOR=lightgreen]s[/COLOR]s.


I don't think it should be illegal, but you should be able to sue for emotional trauma. As far as I can think of right now, adultery is less excusable than murder. You can kill someone in self-defence or in the defence of others and be on the moral high ground, but is there ever a good reason to betray the person that trusts you most when you can just leave? I don't think so.

I don't think he literally meant it either. He was being saracstic but he was putting words in my mouth or twisitng my quotes. Thats annoying.

Thanks for reminded me that just because I dont like something it doesnt logically lead to saying it should burn in hell. It's almost like I said the exact same thing previously.

As far as the rape thing I couldnt make it more clear what my point was. I got tired of explaining "I don't see why we should be selective to circumstanes where victims stupidity put them at risk". And no, it doesnt mean "LOL THEY DRESS SEXY THEY DESERVE IT". Because thats not what I beleive or said. Saying different is classified as either making things up or just being a dick.

I like Speedfreak's idea of suing. Looking at the current state of over crowded prisons and the low morality of the entire Earth population it would be a better option.

...jesus.

I understand that you werent saying that. Thats not up for debate. We all agree to that. Fine, we got it. The problem is that what you are saying supports that other stuff. You may not mean it, but it does. Thats just the way it is. its been explain before, so I'm going to stop trying now before I do actually get ****ed off, but suffice it to say that nobody is saying that you think that. We're just saying that what you are saying isnt viable, based on the fact that it supports things that are unacceptable.

Think of it as saying "I support the nazi party, but I dont think Jews shouldnt be killed." It doesnt work that way; one begets the other.

It doesnt though. There is a clear difference between "if someones knows they are going to cause harm to them" and "lol dressing he way you want is bad". We're going round in circles. It's exaclty why I stopped posting in the rape thread.

Yes, it does. nobody knows that they are going to be raped until its happening. And your ZOMG DARK ALLIES!!!1! is BS, since like it was mentioned earlier, the vast majority of rapes are done in the home by someone that the person knows. And one could easily say that "you should have known that dressing that way would provoke me" or "its not my fault, i thought she wanted teh c0ck cuz she dressed like a whore" I've heard both of those used before. its not like we're just making this **** up. It happens.

Dark allies? What are you talking about? When did I say if a girl walks down an alley and gets raped she deserves it? Yes most rapes do occur in the home. Most murders are committed by people known to the victim but we dont forget about the others do we? THEY STILL EXIST

I didnt used to think a rape victim could be at fault. Until I heard about the girl at my school. As explained she ignored warnings and was sexual harrased (not raped). It's rare a scenario like this would actually happen. But it did happen. And I honeslty think this girl was being an idiot. Theres been this big thing were people against the idea think I, and others with the same view, mean that in every rape case a>the girl is to blame or b>she can be blamed. As with any situation, criminal or not, my view still stands that if a person chooses to sabotage their well being by having the intelligence to avoid it otherwise than they are at fault, and the consiqunce shouldnt releive them of it. I'm not going to be selective when it comes to this view so, as hard as it is, it still stands for rape, child abuse, terrorist acts and whatever. Circle end please?

[COLOR="Yellow"]Bebop, i swear, my broken record doesn't repeat itself as much as you do.[/COLOR]

I wouldnt have to repeat myself if people read my posts the first time :c As for Spam's view on adultery: your view that adultery shouldnt isnt very strong when you admit your a cheater
I wouldnt have to repeat myself if people read my posts the first time :c As for Spam's view on adultery: your view that adultery shouldnt isnt very strong when you admit your a cheater
I wouldnt have to repeat myself if people read my posts the first time :c As for Spam's view on adultery: your view that adultery shouldnt isnt very strong when you admit your a cheater

Again, it doesnt matter if in that one weird tiny circumstance it might maybe possibly be her fault. The fact is that there was no way to know that she would have been harassed/raped. Knowing that its more likely does not mean that it will happen, and besides, it still lessens the guilt for someone commiting an illegal action. Even if it was the girls fault, it doesnt matter, since you cant lessen someone's crime just because "girl should have known better." And since ANY lawyer/barrister worth his salt can just say "Dude, she's partially at fault, my client gets reduced sentence k thnx" its unfair to say that a girl ir at fault for something that she had no control over.

Also, ZOMG DARK ALLIES is dark alleys in "making fun of you by talking like a total moron"ese, but it seems like you got that covered. Good job, you get a cookie.

yeah, my opinion means nothing. Going with the established system that grants rights to those who are taken advantage of is CLEARLY the wrong option since I said it. Rather, we should legislate peoples personal lives into oblivion, and at the same time add to the already overcrowded jails a segment of the population who have no real criminal interest.

Also, the term cheater is misleading. I cheated once, under the effects of way too much booze (not that its an excuse, its just the reason. I wouldnt have done it if I had been sober, but at the same time I shouldnt have gotten taht drunk to begin with). Calling someone a cheater implies a consistant pattern of cheating and no remose for doing so. I, however, dont cheat under normal circumstances and still feel bad about doing it the one time I did.

Well if the lawyer/barrister can do it then well done on doing your job. But then its a judge being dumb. For the woods example, I wouldnt reduce the harrassers sentence at all. But that shouldnt stop me thinking "yeh she was pretty dumb". It just seems nowadays people are never willing to put things into context. Like the beating womens thread, there are people who, regardless of context, will always say hitting a woman is wrong. I just dont understand why people are willing to be selective over idiots.

If your going to mock me could you at least try to mention something I've said? Otherwise it's just you acting childish. I mean it woudlnt be nice if I called you a Nazi for you, as you put it, "nigga jew bashing" views.