Should Adultery be illegal?
- Thread starter Gmart
- Start date
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
No, Yes, Eh?
Gmart
Well-Known Member
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Don't be an idiot Gmart.
zenie
>^^<
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
This isn't fucking Saudi Arabia.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry I thought the the general consensus was that if there is a victim there should be a law against it, so why not this. With the laws against prostitution and drugs the victim often refuses (annoyingly for moralists) to accept that they are a victim, leaving two consenting adults. At least here we have a victim who agrees!!I am just trying to get to the bottom of the wish for the government to get involved with moral issues!! When should a government moralise for the individual?
I have tried to suggest on other threads that freedom should be the priority, but sadly hardly anyone else agrees with me, and so I am trying to understand this knee jerk tendency towards authoritarianism...
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
I am just trying to get to the bottom of the wish for the government to get involved with moral issues!! When should a government moralise for the individual?
I have tried to suggest on other threads that freedom should be the priority, but sadly hardly anyone else agrees with me, and so I am trying to understand this knee jerk tendency towards authoritarianism...
Where did the general consensus of opinion form that if there's a victim there should be a law then?
Govts have no place legislating morality to anyone. Quite frankly things like DV laws are bollocks, and had to be placed on the statute books specifically because the existing laws that should have been used (such as GBH etc) for whatever reasons it wasn't possible to use tort to argue them into the context of a domestic relationship (or, more likely, that precedents always favoured the male since they were arrived at when it was a man's right to beat and rape his wife, and precedent is extremely important in English law)
untethered
For industry & decency
The aim of the family courts with respect to children and property isn't to "punish" the guilty party. It gives child custody and property to the most suitable parent, usually the mother.
Thus, an unfaithful mother could in some senses be seen to profit from her immoral acts.
Sugarmouse
DVNC
If it was where wuold the lines be drawn? What about swingers and 'open' relationships, people who have relationships and work in the sex industry?
How would a case of 'infidelity' be defined?
Infidelity within a marriage as Fruitloop said is already a grounds for divorce, I dont think it needs to be much more strict than such.
How would a case of 'infidelity' be defined?
Infidelity within a marriage as Fruitloop said is already a grounds for divorce, I dont think it needs to be much more strict than such.
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
i hope not, otherwise my pastime of entertaining bored housewives in exchange for hot meals will soon become far trickier.
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
Well it used to be against the law, but you could also sue for breach of promise if someone agreed to marry you then changed their mind.
Probably a bit pointless, would you also make a law against the breakdown in the relationship, or hurtful thing that one party may have committed that led/contributed to the other party committing adultery?
Probably a bit pointless, would you also make a law against the breakdown in the relationship, or hurtful thing that one party may have committed that led/contributed to the other party committing adultery?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
stupid idea.
I have tried to suggest on other threads that freedom should be the priority, but sadly hardly anyone else agrees with me, and so I am trying to understand this knee jerk tendency towards authoritarianism...
It's in the british psyche mate. I can't begin to imagine another country that would install so many millions of cameras to keep watch on its population.
Being fingerprinted and iris scanned at airports.
I hear face scanning is now in testing at some airports...
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
they got told they couldn't do that so all the equipment installed is now yet more wasted money in the fiasco that is Terminal 5
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
There is a difference between 'for a crime to exist there must be a victim' and 'if a victim exists there must be a crime'.
Think about it. It's kind of logic for primary school children.
Ahh, another oxymoron in UK life: british efficiency...
stdPikachu
Plughole in bathtub curve
"Impacts" on society? In what way?
If you're arguing that we should protect the rights of partners not to suffer mental anguish at the hands of their SO's... excuse me whilst I asphyxiate with laughter. Impossible without forcing the government to teach us moral values with a gun against our heads, or replacing human nature with something along the lines of complexity of a planarian worm. Or perhaps only married people should have rights not to have their partners cheat on them?
Personally, I'm of the opnion that marriage is a pretty dangerous concept in of itself as it tries to get people to stay together when thet might not neccesarily want to. It's a contract that says "I'm with this person", and I don't really see why a contract is needed if you actually, you know, love them.
Similar threads
