Are extramarital affairs really that bad?

[whichwayisup]

I agree I OFTEN type atrociously because I could not be bothered to cut my text, spell check it and repaste it. because when you repaste it it ends up with all this html crap on it. And I am often too lazy to re-read before I hit send...I type really fast and carelessly sometimes NO ONE is disputing that.

 

HOWEVER as I just explained to a4a in a PM because she felt the need to contact me privately about this, my typos don't result in a sarcastic belittling and insulting post, well some may be insulted by my typos but it's not intended to offend anyone.

 

When she copies the meaning of a word from the dictionary for me, that even my 3 yr old nephew knows the meaning to, that's beyond saracasm that is just plain old insulting. So if you wanna play like that don't point out to me that personal attacks on LS are considered a crime, lead by example and that's that. OR play dirty but take the jabs back when they are thrown at you.

 

For the record, do you two realise just how much time we have wasted on this pettiness that could have been avoided had a4a just responded to my intial question with a relevant answer as opposed to an insult that totally threw the debate off track? Not to mention she is the one reminding ME about code of conduct on LS? :lmao:

 

don't make me laugh.

 

The thing is, you never know where someone's head is. OR if they have learning disabilities...Or if they just generally SUCK at grammer.

 

TC, you, me, a4a, whoever, we're ALL guilty of getting sucked in, reacting and stuff, I have NO problem admitting this about myself. Problem is, you point fingers and then act like you are above it all and won't lower yourself to someone else's level by reacting, when infact, you do the same thing that you take issue with here with others.

 

Also, you have reminded many others of personal conduct as well on LS, in various posts too. You've also told newer members which posts to ignore and which posts to respond to....

 

Anyway, bottomline, you never know what someone's life is like offline, or how their day is going, and that is something everyone has to keep in mind.

[Tomcat33]

It was not an insult it is the definition of a crime that is widely accepted.

 

I had no reason to insult you. PM me if you would like to continue this off topic banter. I am only posting this so it is clear that me posting a REAL DEFINITION was not an insult.... but a word that I used in the correct manner to describe an affair as a crime as stated/defined by the dictionary.

 

 

We were discussing a scenario where by you thought it was a crime to do something and I thought it was a question of morals not a crime. I asked you to define THE crime just so that we were on the same page, and you responded with a the definition of crime!

 

 

If I wanted the definition of crime I would have said "define crime"

 

 

"define" modifies the word "crime"

 

 

but I said define THE crime,

 

the word "define" modifies the word "THE" not "crime"

 

 

 

a little lesson in grammar for all us english speaking folk!

[Tomcat33]

 

Also, you have reminded many others of personal conduct as well on LS, in various posts too. You've also told newer members which posts to ignore and which posts to respond to....

 

 

Not in the same sentence I am insulting someone, no I haven't.

 

 

At any rate..."you never know if a person has learning disabilites"

 

 

??? c'mon!!!! :lmao:

 

I can assure you that a4a does not have learning disabilites, her use of sarcasm was learned just fine!

 

 

I never asked a4a for the definition of the word crime so there was no point to that.

[whichwayisup]

I can assure you that a4a does not have learning disabilites, her use of sarcasm was learned just fine!

 

Do you know that for a fact TC? Do you know a4a and all about her life?

 

So what if you never asked her for the defination! She put it out there anyway, so what is the big deal?

[NoIDidn't]

Hi, WWIU. I see the SSDD is still going on here. I'll PM the definition.

[Tomcat33]

So what if you never asked her for the defination! She put it out there anyway, so what is the big deal?

 

 

She put it out there quoting my question. So she made it about me. If she was just offering a definition there was no need to quote me in particular.

Now let it go WWIUP. Just let it go! Or I will be forced to report all this and we ALL go down.

 

just let it go.

[Herzen]

The interesting question is whether adultery should be criminalized. And if it is criminalized, would a criminal prosecution pass constitutional muster under the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause and "penumbral" privacy rights.

 

Perhaps there should be a New Prohibition:One that targets extra-marital sex as opposed to alcohol consumption.

 

Where is "adultery's" Carey Nation?

[OpenBook]

Perhaps there should be a New Prohibition:One that targets extra-marital sex as opposed to alcohol consumption.

 

Boy, what a mess we would have!! Half (at least?) of the adult population would be in jail or under prosecution.

[whichwayisup]

Boy, what a mess we would have!! Half (at least?) of the adult population would be in jail or under prosecution.

 

Or missing certain limbs, depending on whether or not jail time is involved! LOL!

[Cliche]

The interesting question is whether adultery should be criminalized. And if it is criminalized, would a criminal prosecution pass constitutional muster under the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause and "penumbral" privacy rights.

 

Probably not since Lawrence v. Texas.

 

Furthermore, criminalization would never happen since adultery is one of those "moral offenses" that the moral high-n-mighty participate in in great numbers. They're not going to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

[a4a]

Or missing certain limbs, depending on whether or not jail time is involved! LOL!

 

limb or appendage?

[Tomcat33]

The interesting question is whether adultery should be criminalized. And if it is criminalized, would a criminal prosecution pass constitutional muster under the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause and "penumbral" privacy rights.

 

Perhaps there should be a New Prohibition:One that targets extra-marital sex as opposed to alcohol consumption.

 

Where is "adultery's" Carey Nation?

 

 

That's an interesting question. I think religion was introduced as the extention of the harder laws. Sort of like the decisions that don't affect too many other people can be thrown under the morality or religious code, all the other ones that hurt others signficantly should be penalized the extreme way so they shall be deemed criminal.

 

Now if a broken morality code is considered to be almost as obstructive and damaging as say, robbing, killing or raping, then they should reform the laws to reflect those moral laws that are not cutting it.

[Herzen]

Probably not since Lawrence v. Texas.

 

Furthermore, criminalization would never happen since adultery is one of those "moral offenses" that the moral high-n-mighty participate in in great numbers. They're not going to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

 

Another lawyer?

 

You're correct, though. I simply left out the case cite to provoke discussion.

 

They're not going to cut off "anything" to spite their faces.

[jj2007]

 

What the spouse and kids don't know, doesn't hurt...

 

Oh yeah and if hubby brings a STD home and shares it with his wife that won't hurt either right?

What about the POS H's that cheat on their pregnant wives? Mother and child could end up with a STD. But that won't hurt 'em if they don't know about it right?

[Cliche]

Another lawyer?

 

Depends. What's the penalty?

[Lizzie60]

Oh yeah and if hubby brings a STD home and shares it with his wife that won't hurt either right?

What about the POS H's that cheat on their pregnant wives? Mother and child could end up with a STD. But that won't hurt 'em if they don't know about it right?

 

You know what I meant when I said that...but if you push it to the extreme, yes, of course a STD would hurt the W... the H has to be responsible when having sex outside and use a condom...which will eliminate most of the STDs.

[Herzen]

Depends. What's the penalty?

 

One that will certainly fit the "crime."

[jj2007]

You know what I meant when I said that...but if you push it to the extreme, yes, of course a STD would hurt the W... the H has to be responsible when having sex outside and use a condom...which will eliminate most of the STDs.

 

Condoms break.

 

Point being, any person in a committed relationship has a right to know if they are sharing their SO with someone else so that they can at least try to protect themselves.

[bish]

the affair is beneficial to their mental well being... therefore to the M. .

 

 

Biggest load of sh!it I have ever heard. An affair beneficial to the marriage? Ya...tell us another good one.

 

I don't think a man that is getting "excitement" from another woman really ends up desiring his wife. if anything, sex with his wife seems even that much more boring and they will avoid it because they like the sex with the OW too much.

 

Sorry...don't buy it.

[whichwayisup]

No, it's only beneficial to the PERSON cheating, MM or MW. FOR THEM the marriage is better because they're getting 'whatever' on the side to keep them happier in the marriage, where the UNsuspecting betrayed spouse thinks all is OK, under false pretenses...

 

So, it really is one sided. And very selfish. UNLESS MM/MW TELLS their spouse, are they're OK with having an open marriage.

[Ladyjane14]

Condoms break.

 

Point being, any person in a committed relationship has a right to know if they are sharing their SO with someone else so that they can at least try to protect themselves.

 

True. I'd just as soon NOT bet my life on the strength of a rubber, thank you.

 

Anybody who wants to play STD-roulette with their life, that's their choice. But dragging people into it who don't know their risk... that's just nasty.

[KATANYA]

Monogomy, IMO, is more of a myth than a norm. I may sound really callous but let's be real here - how many "happy" married couples do you know? After the wedding is over and the honeymoon scrapbook is put away couples settle in to routine and responsibility and, IMO, that replaces passion and romance! Many MM/MW find other outlets for their "affairs" - may not be another partner, may be work, their kids, etc. etc. whatever it takes to make them feel fulfilled and replace what is missing in their lives - I just don't buy that one person can be "everything" to another person for their whole lives. Why get married at all then? Well, I guess that is how we meet the norms that society dictates "Get married, have kids, buy a station wagon, get a mortgage, etc. etc. etc." Doesn't mean it works - just that its what is expected and most people want to conform and fit in with "what's expected". Just my opinion......

[Darth Vader]

Can you demonstrate that a god exists? If not you are just blowing hot air. If the best you can do is to say that a connection between a husband and wife is a form of worship of your imaginary friend, then maybe you should wake up to reality.

 

You haven’t been paying attention. My affections for the women in my life are not contingent on exclusivity.

 

I grew up in an era and an area where feminism blossomed into a viable movement. Part of that is the idea that men don’t own women and vice versa. Plus I grew up with the intelligence and the presence of mind to see religion as the variance of reality that it is. You are just going to have to get used to the idea that not everybody sees the world as you do, nor has any desire to do so, and is not wrong because of that difference.

 

With one woman I had an eight year affair. Her husband would often take business trips where he would be gone for weeks and months at a time, only calling once a week or so. I met her at a party were she had a little too much to drink and needed a ride home. It didn’t take long to discover that she drank excessively because she was alone all the time.

 

When we began she was spending $200-300 a month on alcohol. It didn’t take long and she wasn’t drinking at all. She broke it off when her husband finally took a job where he would be home every night. It’s been about a dozen years and they are still together. I still have regular contact with her. She’s told me that she would have left him if I hadn’t been there when she was left alone.

 

By some posters opinions the right thing to do would be to tell her husband. I think that you are all twisted.

 

 

I don't have to demonstrate, look around you, everything that is, has been created by God. God gave man the ability to learn, to build houses, to create things. The ecosystem/s are in perfect balance. On the exception of man's pollution, but, that's another story. I'm not the one who has to "Wake Up", you do! Reality? You don't even know what Realty is. I've seen things that would make you piss and crap yourself! And not on Gods level! That's Reality! No drug trips, nothing. Who's intelligence, Mans? Please, man isn't smart, he/she just thinks they are. Not paying attention? I have enough to know what you are. But enough of that.

 

Her husband was working to support his wife, and you justify sleeping with her because she quit drinking and felt lonely? She quit drinking at what cost? What cost to her husband? They're doing great? Her husband's living a Lie because of you! Their marriage isn't real! Yes, every man, and woman does see things differently, and does things differently, but, when done contrary to Gods Law, (I'm not saying to walk in the Law because that's impossible to do), the penalty is Death.(Eternal Death) But I have a feeling you know what I'm talking about.

[Darth Vader]

To me OW/OM are like people that pick a dead person's pockets. Sure they didn't kill the person but they profit off of misery which is just as bad.

 

 

I agree to that!

[Trialbyfire]

Biggest load of sh!it I have ever heard. An affair beneficial to the marriage? Ya...tell us another good one.

 

I don't think a man that is getting "excitement" from another woman really ends up desiring his wife. if anything, sex with his wife seems even that much more boring and they will avoid it because they like the sex with the OW too much.

 

Sorry...don't buy it.

No offense to anyone but there is one way it would be beneficial. If sex is so bad with the third party, it would make the WS think that what he/she has at home, is Heaven on Earth.