84 replies to this topic

[Sweeney]

All onus is on the married person. I have no obligation to preserve their relationship. Your marriage is not my concern, you want to maintain your relationship that's your business. This is something I don't understand, why people give shit to 'homewreckers', all it takes is for the married person to say no. That being said, if I was married I sure as hell wouldn't cheat.

Do you not have an obligation to not willingly and knowingly hurt a person?

Would you sleep with your best friend's partner?

He asked me if it was a problem and I said no

Why did you say that?

Not my marriage, not my problem. I’m not being shackled by someone’s else shaky morality.

I mean, it could very well end up being your problem if you want to take an entirely egocentric pragmatic viewpoint. Why not just shack up with someone without all the baggage and save yourself the trouble?

[Trapezeo]

Do you not have an obligation to not willingly and knowingly hurt a person?

Would you sleep with your best friend's partner?


Why did you say that?


I mean, it could very well end up being your problem if you want to take an entirely egocentric pragmatic viewpoint. Why not just shack up with someone without all the baggage and save yourself the trouble?

My personal morals said it wasn’t my responsibility. I didn’t cheat on anyone. Everyone is different though.

[Sweeney]

My personal morals said it wasn’t my responsibility. I didn’t cheat on anyone. Everyone is different though.

Sure, you didn't breach someone's trust that you knew, or someone that you personally made an agreement with. But you did knowingly help someone else break a promise. Is it OK just because you don't know the guy's wife?

[Volition]

The married person has an obligation to not willingly hurt someone, if they wanted to cheat they will and the only thing I can change is whether if they cheat with me or with someone else. If it's my best friend's partner I'd have a friendship to preserve so no I wouldn't sleep with their partner. 

[Sweeney]

The married person has an obligation to not willingly hurt someone, if they wanted to cheat they will and the only thing I can change is whether if they cheat with me or with someone else. If it's my best friend's partner I'd have a friendship to preserve so no I wouldn't sleep with their partner.

Kevin is going to kill someone whether I sell him this gun or not, so I may as well make a buck.
Barry is going to steal that candy whether I help him or not, so I may as well get some Laffy Taffy out of it.
Jeremy is going to sell that weed to highschoolers whether or not I drive him to the playground, so I may as well get a nug out of it.
Tony is going to cheat on his wife wether or not it's with me, so I may as well get a good lay out of it.

I don't see a difference between these situations other than degree. The "may as well" character still has culpability for the negative effects of their actions, no matter how hard they want to rationalise them away.

Also, why do you feel the need to preserve that relationship by not sleeping with their partner? According to you, you'd have done nothing wrong and this hypothetical cheater would shoulder all the blame.
Unless, of course, it doesn't really work that way when you have to face the consequences of your actions.

[Rocket]

My first husband cheated on me, many times. I know for a fact at least two of the people he cheated with knew he was married and still hooked up with him. I personally think they are pieces of shit because they willingly contributed to the failure of my marriage. The other girls he deceived by saying he was single, I don't necessarily blame them, but I don't have any good feelings towards them. My ex on the other hand, a complete and utter piece of shit, the king of shits. 

(This was 10 years ago and I still hope he gets hit by a bus)

[Ghartun]

 

 

lol you absolutely can when we're talking about a violation of trust.
If you asked me not to eat any of the cookies you baked for your Mom, then eating them would be a dick move. If I offered them to my wife without telling her they were not meant to be eaten, she's not responsible because she didn't know. But if I offer them to my wife and tell her they're not meant to be eaten she becomes a conspirator and is responsible also.

It sounds to me like you don't believe the less aggressive person in a relationship holds any responsibility for their actions - like if someone seduced you, you'd lose all capacity to think for yourself. No doubt that your ex is responsible for cheating on you, but if the person they cheated on you with was aware that it was an adulterous relationship then they are responsible too. 

 

I totally see from where you are coming from, but this analogy is also wrong. The cookies weren't out there seeking someone to eat them you know?

But hey that's you, and if that's what you believe in then great, it's none of my business, I just don't like people who go out and point fingers (not talking about you).

 

Ah also in the "seducing" setting I meant that both are equally responsible if it's not clear.

[Volition]

My quote function isn't working properly right now I'm just gonna gonna @ people

 

@ Sweeney

 

Three of those things are illegal, one is 'immoral', as you've stated the degree is different, and to me that changes a lot with regards to my actions.

If Kevin kills someone with the gun do you blame the gun or Kevin?

If Barry steals the candy do you blame the candy?

If Jeremy sells weed do you blame the weed or blame Jeremy?

If Tony wants to cheat on his wife would I blame you?

 

Think about it this way, if my girlfriend wanted to cheat there's nothing I could do to stop her aside from maintaining my own faithfulness and reaffirming that if she does the relationship is over. You want to be in a faithful committed relationship? Find someone faithful. If she cheats then I need to reassess how I choose my girlfriends, if I cheat I'm an asshole.

 

@ Amethyst

 

Cheaters are the problem. The trust in a relationship comes from within, you're expecting it to come from outside. 

[Sweeney]

Three of those things are illegal, one is 'immoral', as you've stated the degree is different, and to me that changes a lot with regards to my actions.
If Kevin kills someone with the gun do you blame the gun or Kevin?
If Barry steals the candy do you blame the candy?
If Jeremy sells weed do you blame the weed or blame Jeremy?
If Tony wants to cheat on his wife would I blame you?
 
Think about it this way, if my girlfriend wanted to cheat there's nothing I could do to stop her aside from maintaining my own faithfulness and reaffirming that if she does the relationship is over. You want to be in a faithful committed relationship? Find someone faithful. If she cheats then I need to reassess how I choose my girlfriends, if I cheat I'm an asshole.

All four of the things are immoral, with the possible exception of the weed sale depending on the context. The legality is irrelevant, as this is a discussion of morals alone.
Your twist on the analogy is meaningless, unless you're describing the unmarried person in an adulterous triste as a tool with no free will. Which seems like a mind-bogglingly absurd position to take.

You last comment has nothing to do with what we're talking about. We're talking about the culpability of the person not in the relationship.

I totally see from where you are coming from, but this analogy is also wrong. The cookies weren't out there seeking someone to eat them you know?
But hey that's you, and if that's what you believe in then great, it's none of my business, I just don't like people who go out and point fingers (not talking about you).
 
Ah also in the "seducing" setting I meant that both are equally responsible if it's not clear.

No. The cookies were the sex in the analogy. I was the cheater, you were the cheatee, and my wife was the person with whom I was cheating. The analogy is fine, I'm sorry it wasn't clear enough for you.

Regarding your last sentence, I am very confused. Can you explain how responsibility is shared if the unmarried person seeks the relationship, but not if the married one does?

[Bellerin]

I mean, it could very well end up being your problem if you want to take an entirely egocentric pragmatic viewpoint. Why not just shack up with someone without all the baggage and save yourself the trouble?

We’re talking sex right? Not fussy relationships/affairs. And that should answer your question.

[Sweeney]

We’re talking sex right? Not fussy relationships/affairs. And that should answer your question.

You're spectacularly naive if you think sex is so easily separated from "fussy relationships".
But that's irrelevant. If one partner in a relationship thinks they're monogamous and the other is seeking extramarital sex, then there's an issue. Knowingly putting yourself into that situation as a third party is not cool.

So, no, you didn't answer my question.

[cara]

My personal morals said it wasn’t my responsibility. I didn’t cheat on anyone. Everyone is different though.

I think that’s where it gets me though. People who don’t give a shit about the person that they don’t know. It makes me sad to think how often people do bad things because they don’t care about anyone they haven’t met.

Honestly I think most of the world’s evils happen because of that.

[Sweeney]

I think that’s where it gets me though. People who don’t give a shit about the person that they don’t know. It makes me sad to think how often people do bad things because they don’t care about anyone they haven’t met.

Honestly I think most of the world’s evils happen because of that.

Man, that's so much of American culture it physically upsets me when I talk about it. Especially when it comes to healthcare.

"Why should I pay for someone else's medical treatment?"
Uh, how about because this is meant to be a civilized society and people dying from preventable disease is a fucking embarrassment.

[Swar]

I think that’s where it gets me though. People who don’t give a shit about the person that they don’t know. It makes me sad to think how often people do bad things because they don’t care about anyone they haven’t met.

Honestly I think most of the world’s evils happen because of that.

 

It really is sad how much selfishness and lack of empathy there is in the world.

[Volition]

@ Sweeney

 

Legality is absolutely relevant, you paralleled infidelity to arming a killer. Those aren't even on the same strata. My twist on the analogy is flawed in that regards, I agree. 

 

I'm trying to show that intrinsically there is no culpability of the person not in the relationship. This needs to be looked at from that perspective in order to show that. The relationship is the foundation on which this problem is built, if there was no relationship to begin with there would be no perceived moral wrong. 

 

@ Amethyst

 

If the problem had no root to begin with there's nothing to exacerbate. It does take two to cheat but if my partner is actively looking to cheat do I really care whom she cheats on me with or even if she's successful with it? Looking to cheat is as bad as cheating.

[Sweeney]

Legality is absolutely relevant, you paralleled infidelity to arming a killer. Those aren't even on the same strata. My twist on the analogy is flawed in that regards, I agree. 
 
I'm trying to show that intrinsically there is no culpability of the person not in the relationship. This needs to be looked at from that perspective in order to show that. The relationship is the foundation on which this problem is built, if there was no relationship to begin with there would be no perceived moral wrong.

You are simply wrong in maintaining that legality is relevant; it is not. The reason those three(ish) things are illegal is that they are considered morally wrong to varying degrees - the fact that infidelity is not illegal does not mean that it is not morally wrong. Indeed, we have all agreed that it is wrong. The comparison is valid based solely on the moral implications of the actions in question.

If, in order to show that the third person has no culpability, you have to compare them to inanimate object with no free will, then your comparison is inane. People do have free will, and if they choose to take part in, enable, or otherwise assist an immoral action then they assume part of responsibility for that act.

[cara]

I don’t feel like going through the effort of quoting twice on my phone so this is in response to both Joe and Swar I suppose.

I’m not sure if it actually is selfishness. I personally find it to be psycopathic. I’m sorry, I don’t mean to offend anyone here who is all for sleeping with married people, but I find it repulsive and I wish people like you did not exist. I’m sorry again, I know I’m being an asshole.

But .. what about that wife? What if she’s wonderful. What if she likes to garden, and knit, and loves her husband dearly. What if she has a cat named Fluffly and loves to read when it’s raining and bake cakes with icing of every colour on top.

What if she’s also a rape victim? If she’s depressed? What if she’s been heavily abused? What if she writes poetry that’s beautiful or sings love songs or paints the sky?

Like .. what the fuck. That’s a person. That wife that you don’t know, that’s still a person. Just because you don’t know her, and try not to think about, in order to dehumanize her. She’s still a person. She might be a lovely person. And you don’t care because .. you don’t know her? So you fuck her husband without an ounce of guilt?

[Volition]

Quoting still not working

 

@ Sweeney

 

I was referring to my last comment on my previous post with that. The twist on your analogy was just an attempt to poke holes, separate from my other comment. 

 

I think at this point we are arguing from two different points, you're looking at it from a moral standpoint. That cheating is wrong, which I've agreed with in my previous posts saying if I cheat when I'm in a relationship I'm asshole. But I'm looking at it from the point of view of the relationship. If I'm an outside actor with no vested interests outside of sex I don't see myself as owing a duty of care to their relationship. It's immoral if I'm the cheater, and I'm amoral if I'm not. I'd feel differently if the third party's intent was to derail the relationship rather than just sex.

[Sweeney]

Quoting still not working
 
@ Sweeney
 
I was referring to my last comment on my previous post with that. The twist on your analogy was just an attempt to poke holes, separate from my other comment. 
 
I think at this point we are arguing from two different points, you're looking at it from a moral standpoint. That cheating is wrong, which I've agreed with in my previous posts saying if I cheat when I'm in a relationship I'm asshole. But I'm looking at it from the point of view of the relationship. If I'm an outside actor with no vested interests outside of sex I don't see myself as owing a duty of care to their relationship. It's immoral if I'm the cheater, and I'm amoral if I'm not. I'd feel differently if the third party's intent was to derail the relationship rather than just sex.

I am having trouble with you saying that participating in an act that we have agreed is immoral only being immoral for one of the people involved.

[Neoquest]

100% agree with Rocket's initial statement. Cheating, especially in a marriage, is super fucked and if you knowingly take part in it you are a bad person in my eyes.

[Shannon]

I think that’s where it gets me though. People who don’t give a shit about the person that they don’t know. It makes me sad to think how often people do bad things because they don’t care about anyone they haven’t met.

Honestly I think most of the world’s evils happen because of that.

 

This this this. I really can't fathom thinking it's okay to fuck over someone else's life because it doesn't concern yours. Sorry not sorry to anyone who feels differently in this thread, but I think anyone who does so is a self-serving ass.

[Adam]

Everyone actively involved should be stoned. Heathens.