Article

2004-09-16 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2004-09-16 10:00:30 AM|| || Front Page|| [11127 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Murat?

Posted by 2B 2004-09-16 11:37:50 AM|| 2004-09-16 11:37:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Funny-does this new "proposal" address the topic of frequency? As the old proposal went, men would be consider adulterers for long-term sexual relationships, women for one-time sex of any kind.

Posted by jules 187 2004-09-16 11:46:43 AM|| 2004-09-16 11:46:43 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Shouldn't that be "proposition", not proposal?

Posted by mojo 2004-09-16 12:08:20 PM|| 2004-09-16 12:08:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 Mojo-:)

Posted by jules 187 2004-09-16 12:15:11 PM|| 2004-09-16 12:15:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 I think Turkey is partially right on this one. We used to have the tort of "alienation of affectons" whereby an abandoned spouse could sue the "other woman." Look at the damage that has been done to the traditional family and, thereby, to society, by sexual infidelity. While criminalization wouldn't work, I say if you help break up someone else's family -- you owe that spouse, and the kids, big-time.

Posted by bkderwood 2004-09-16 2:48:52 PM|| 2004-09-16 2:48:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 I have never understood spouses who want to sue the "person that broke up the marriage". Of the 3 persons affected by the infidelity, that is unarguably the only person who didn't break a vow. To blame them makes it very convenient for the person who actually betrayed the spouse.

And different standards for men and women, bkderwood? If you can live with that, you're closer to the Muslim philosophy than you think.

I agree with you to this extent, bkderwood: infidelity does great harm to the family.

Posted by jules 187 2004-09-16 2:57:46 PM|| 2004-09-16 2:57:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Where did you get the idea that I had different standards for men and women? The fact that I used one feminine pronoun in one example? The tort always went both ways -- though men were more frequently the defendants.

As for "breaking a vow" -- marriage is a public institution that should be honored by all. If you go after someone else's spouse, you are just as bad as the cheating spouse, particularly if you are trying to lure them into infidelity. If you intentionally do harm to someone's family through behavior unworthy of protection, why should you not pay for the consequences (emotional distress from a broken home)?

Posted by bkderwood 2004-09-16 3:20:45 PM|| 2004-09-16 3:20:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Where did you get the idea that I had different standards for men and women? I got it from the Turkish proposal. See #2. It was a general statement, not a slam on you.

As to the rest of your comment, I disagree. Cheaters are the ones responsible for desecrating the public institution of marriage. "Go after someone else's spouse"? What, with a gun? Fidelity is a choice that tests a person's integrity and commitment to their loved one, and their God, if they have one.

"Lure"? This is a word from the scapegoater's holy book. I think there is too much scapegoating going around these days.

Posted by jules 187 2004-09-16 3:35:05 PM|| 2004-09-16 3:35:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 I never excused the cheating spouse. But if someone is inviting your spouse to bed, that person is also scum.

Posted by bkderwood 2004-09-16 3:42:51 PM|| 2004-09-16 3:42:51 PM|| Front Page Top

18:16 Anonymous6498
18:16 Anonymous6498
16:24 Anonymous6495
16:24 Anonymous6495
15:47 Anonymous6494
13:33 Anonymous6490
13:33 Anonymous6490
09:21 Anonymous6481
09:21 Anonymous6481
16:51 herry
16:43 herry
12:39 Steve85308
10:09 Robert Crawford
08:51 Raptor
02:06 Quana
01:25 Zenster
01:15 Asedwich
00:03 Atomic Conspiracy
23:49 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:42 Aussie Mike
23:41 Trolling for Allan
23:25 Guest
23:18 BigEd
23:15 BombIranNow