Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 It's like prostitution. why is it such a lucrative business? Because there are plenty of people willing to pay for sex. just a thought... Yes, prostitution is a lucrative business. The smart ones ensure they get paid for their efforts... Link to post Share on other sites
Author Lizzie60 Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 Oh, before I forget, another poster mentioned that you don't own someone. I agree, you don't own someone but you have the legal right to their fidelity... No one owns anyone else and no one has the legal right to their fidelity either. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 No one owns anyone else and no one has the legal right to their fidelity either. Oh? You're not too bright are you... Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Being faithful is a moral choice, it is only a legal right when used against a partner for grounds in a divorce. Otherwise you can't go to jail for being unfaithful, it's not a criminal act. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Legal right does not mean criminal act... A marriage is a compact. When one party breaks the compact of which fidelity is one of them, the other party can pursue divorce and get it, with the courts favouring the betrayed wife financially... Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Legal right does not mean criminal act... A marriage is a compact. When one party breaks the compact of which fidelity is one of them, the other party can pursue divorce and get it, with the courts favouring the betrayed wife financially... Is that not what I just said? it is only a legal right when used against a partner for grounds in a divorce. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Is that not what I just said? it is only a legal right when used against a partner for grounds in a divorce. No. It is the legal right for the betrayed spouse to expect and demand fidelity during the term of the agreement, which is...a lifetime. If the terms and conditions of the agreement are not upheld, the spouse can pursue a legal sundering of this agreement through the courts and be compensated for their grief and pain. Two totally different things... Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 It does seem that more and more women look at a ring as an invitation. I have a had a few women try since I got married and I always turn them down. There are plenty of single people ofboth genders who want to nothing but sleep around with as many people. Why can't they just all sleep with each other and leave married people alone. That is the society we live in these days though. Everybody is out for themselves and the hell with others. The children of the me generation have grown up. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Lizzie60 Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 Being faithful is a moral choice, it is only a legal right when used against a partner for grounds in a divorce. Otherwise you can't go to jail for being unfaithful, it's not a criminal act. I think that under Canadian laws, even infidelity cannot be used for grounds in a divorce. Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 No. It is the legal right for the betrayed spouse to expect and demand fidelity during the term of the agreement, which is...a lifetime. If the terms and conditions of the agreement are not upheld, the spouse can pursue a legal sundering of this agreement through the courts and be compensated for their grief and pain. Two totally different things... Actually, if we are going to get technical about it: it's the right of BOTH paties to expect fidelity not just the BS. Infidelity CAN be used as automatic grounds for divorce should the BS choose to take action. As far as the monetary compensation goes, many variables to take into consideration. It's not so cut and dry, "you cheat you pay". You cheat I can get instant divorce, yes, as far as dividing up the goods, everything has to be proven in court. You''d better have some good hard proof the affair took place to prove all that physical stuff went on otherwise it really comes down to good lawyers. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I think that under Canadian laws, even infidelity cannot be used for grounds in a divorce. One word describes your comment. WRONG... Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I think that under Canadian laws, even infidelity cannot be used for grounds in a divorce. yup Canadian/British laws are different to that of the US. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Lizzie60 Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 It does seem that more and more women look at a ring as an invitation. I have a had a few women try since I got married and I always turn them down. There are plenty of single people ofboth genders who want to nothing but sleep around with as many people. Why can't they just all sleep with each other and leave married people alone. That is the society we live in these days though. Everybody is out for themselves and the hell with others. The children of the me generation have grown up. Why can't they just all sleep with each other and leave married people alone. No one is forcing the married partner into something he/she doesn't want to do...right? plus I'm sure for some married men/women it is a good ego boost to know that they are still sexy and looked at. Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 The way it works is Infidelity will grant you instant divorce as opposed to filing and having to wait a whole year as you would for a normal divorce. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 yup Canadian/British laws are different to that of the US. Canadian laws are not British laws and you're both wrong. Link to post Share on other sites
whichwayisup Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 I think that under Canadian laws, even infidelity cannot be used for grounds in a divorce. http://www.law-faqs.org/nat/di-grd-05.htm The days of having to hire a private detective to prove adultery are long gone! If you want to establish adultery, it should be sufficient for you to give evidence of it in your written affidavit. If your spouse contests this, you can file an affidavit from anyone who might have personal knowledge of the adultery in order to establish it as a fact. Remember that divorce in Canada is not supposed to be about penalties for a spouse who has committed adultery, merely to establish that the marriage is over — although a 2006 Supreme Court of Canada decison suggested that the effects of infidelity may be relevant in determining the consequences of the adultery and subsequent financial settlements. http://www.familylawtoronto.ca/divorce.html CONDONTATION AND CONNIVANCE If a person is seeking a divorce on the grounds of cruelty or adultery, they must not have forgiven the offence (condonation) or plotted with the spouse to create the offence in order to obtain a quick divorce (connivance). In other words, you can’t encourage your spouse to have sex with someone in order to be able to sue for adultery. If the spouses resume cohabitation with a view to reconcile and the "injured" spouse has forgiven the "offending" spouse, and the activity (either the cruelty or adultery) has ceased, then the "injured" party cannot rely on adultery or cruelty that occurred prior to the resumption of the relationship as grounds for divorce. In addition, there are a number of peculiar evidentiary and procedural rules in an adultery action that make suing for divorce on the basis of adultery even more complicated. As a result, most Canadian divorces are based on separation for one year and even most people who seek a divorce on the basis of adultery or cruelty often end up being divorced on the basis of the one year’s separation, rather than incur the cost of a contested trial. Remember Tie Domi and Belinda??????? You're in Canada so you should know this story. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Lizzie60 Posted April 30, 2007 Author Share Posted April 30, 2007 http://www.law-faqs.org/nat/di-grd-05.htm The days of having to hire a private detective to prove adultery are long gone! If you want to establish adultery, it should be sufficient for you to give evidence of it in your written affidavit. If your spouse contests this, you can file an affidavit from anyone who might have personal knowledge of the adultery in order to establish it as a fact. Remember that divorce in Canada is not supposed to be about penalties for a spouse who has committed adultery, merely to establish that the marriage is over — although a 2006 Supreme Court of Canada decison suggested that the effects of infidelity may be relevant in determining the consequences of the adultery and subsequent financial settlements. http://www.familylawtoronto.ca/divorce.html CONDONTATION AND CONNIVANCE If a person is seeking a divorce on the grounds of cruelty or adultery, they must not have forgiven the offence (condonation) or plotted with the spouse to create the offence in order to obtain a quick divorce (connivance). In other words, you can’t encourage your spouse to have sex with someone in order to be able to sue for adultery. If the spouses resume cohabitation with a view to reconcile and the "injured" spouse has forgiven the "offending" spouse, and the activity (either the cruelty or adultery) has ceased, then the "injured" party cannot rely on adultery or cruelty that occurred prior to the resumption of the relationship as grounds for divorce. In addition, there are a number of peculiar evidentiary and procedural rules in an adultery action that make suing for divorce on the basis of adultery even more complicated. As a result, most Canadian divorces are based on separation for one year and even most people who seek a divorce on the basis of adultery or cruelty often end up being divorced on the basis of the one year’s separation, rather than incur the cost of a contested trial. Remember Tie Domi and Belinda??????? You're in Canada so you should know this story. I never followed their story... I don,t give a hoot about Tie and Belinda... I have never been married so 'divorce' is no concern for me... Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Canadian laws are not British laws and you're both wrong. Did I say Canadian laws were British? Or did I say Canadian laws and British laws are different to that of the US's? I took into considerations we have a lot of British posters on here it's not just north americans. Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 http://www.law-faqs.org/nat/di-grd-05.htm The days of having to hire a private detective to prove adultery are long gone! If you want to establish adultery, it should be sufficient for you to give evidence of it in your written affidavit. If your spouse contests this, you can file an affidavit from anyone who might have personal knowledge of the adultery in order to establish it as a fact. Remember that divorce in Canada is not supposed to be about penalties for a spouse who has committed adultery, merely to establish that the marriage is over — although a 2006 Supreme Court of Canada decison suggested that the effects of infidelity may be relevant in determining the consequences of the adultery and subsequent financial settlements. http://www.familylawtoronto.ca/divorce.html CONDONTATION AND CONNIVANCE If a person is seeking a divorce on the grounds of cruelty or adultery, they must not have forgiven the offence (condonation) or plotted with the spouse to create the offence in order to obtain a quick divorce (connivance). In other words, you can’t encourage your spouse to have sex with someone in order to be able to sue for adultery. If the spouses resume cohabitation with a view to reconcile and the "injured" spouse has forgiven the "offending" spouse, and the activity (either the cruelty or adultery) has ceased, then the "injured" party cannot rely on adultery or cruelty that occurred prior to the resumption of the relationship as grounds for divorce. In addition, there are a number of peculiar evidentiary and procedural rules in an adultery action that make suing for divorce on the basis of adultery even more complicated. As a result, most Canadian divorces are based on separation for one year and even most people who seek a divorce on the basis of adultery or cruelty often end up being divorced on the basis of the one year’s separation, rather than incur the cost of a contested trial. Remember Tie Domi and Belinda??????? You're in Canada so you should know this story. Thank-you. It was like watching misinformation being compounded by two people who have neither the experience or knowledge over this. The difficulty for me is to not discuss my current legal actions... Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Thank-you. It was like watching misinformation being compounded by two people who have neither the experience or knowledge over this. I don't need to have a man have and A on me to know my law, thank you very much. I have knowledge enough of my legal system. Remember that divorce in Canada is not supposed to be about penalties for a spouse who has committed adultery, merely to establish that the marriage is over — although a 2006 Supreme Court of Canada decison suggested that the effects of infidelity may be relevant in determining the consequences of the adultery and subsequent financial settlements. I said, infidelity just speeds up the process it grants you instant access to divorce, the marriage is considered over . If you have a good lawyer he can work out the rest. As opposed to most cases that take a year, you can do yours in less if it's due to infidelity. Go back and read what I said Trial. Link to post Share on other sites
Herzen Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 There are national differences when it comes to affairs according to the new book on the Shackers favorite whipping boy: Adultery. See, "Lust in Translation," Pamela Druckerman. Americans, according to Druckerman, are much more guilty and angst-ridden about adultery as opposed to, say, the French. And these are the folks who cheat! National differences matter--and there is no universal morality about this particular popular misbehavior. Just once, I'd love to see someone come here and seriously argue in favor of adultery. We've seen, on LS, pederasts, sexual abstainers, etc., but never someone who could persuasively, cogently and effectively argue in favor of extra-marital affairs. Perhaps that day will come. Otherwise, marriage remains the best argument in favor of affairs. Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat33 Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 There are national differences when it comes to affairs according to the new book on the Shackers favorite whipping boy: Adultery. See, "Lust in Translation," Pamela Druckerman. Americans, according to Druckerman, are much more guilty and angst-ridden about adultery as opposed to, say, the French. And these are the folks who cheat! National differences matter--and there is no universal morality about this particular popular misbehavior. Just once, I'd love to see someone come here and seriously argue in favor of adultery. We've seen, on LS, pederasts, sexual abstainers, etc., but never someone who could persuasively, cogently and effectively argue in favor of extra-marital affairs. Perhaps that day will come. Otherwise, marriage remains the best argument in favor of affairs. Well in my opinion Lizzie, in her own way is doing a pretty good job at arguing in favour of them, question is do the die hard moralists want to listen? I'm not FOR As, in fact my stance is irrelevant, but she's argued all her points as to why it works for her, in her particular life, in her particular existence and a lot seems to be concerned with trying to talk her out of it. She's presented her point IT WORKS for her, the fact that some cannot digest that idea is a different story... Link to post Share on other sites
justice Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Oh, before I forget, another poster mentioned that you don't own someone. I agree, you don't own someone but you have the legal right to their fidelity... Well Said Trialbyfire. Amen, thank heavens there are sane and decent people like you left in this sad, mixed up world. Link to post Share on other sites
kymberann Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I just hope you are using protection for all of your OMs sake...and for their wivws as well! Link to post Share on other sites
pureinheart Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I understand your point, but, this woman has what to do with your particular case? Even if this thread is real, which I doubt it is, she is really doing herself a diservice, never mind everyone else involved. Women who try to cheat nature are only cheating themselves, isn't that a big enough price to pay? The pain and suffering inflicted onto oneself? Pretty ironic if you ask me. Life has a way of working itself out despite all the accusations people from the outside may feel compelled to ignite. It's like women who think that they are modern and behave like men thinking that they can engage in casual sex no strings attached with men. Women are not biologically programmed to have sex without emotion.On a very subconscious level, the reason we develop feelings for men when we have sex with them is because our bodies are trying to tell us that said man could be our child's father. Nature made it that way so that women could engage in monogamous relationships to provide the children a safe environment with a loving mother AND father. Regardles of her conscious needs to bear children, this happens on a deep subconscious level. Can you imagine where monogamy would be if we weren't programmed that way? It wouldn't exist, because we all know that men are programmed completely differently. If a woman thinks she is THAT powerful to be able to tick mother nature by trying to act like a man, then she is in for a big wake up call. Most women can't handle it. Sooner or later the subconscious becomes conscious. I personally think that's punishment enough. Again, my opinion. You brought up a very good point here.... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts