Should adultery be a crime?

Is adultery a crime?

  • Total voters
    29
samcdkey said:
The reason I asked this question is because an Indian army captain told me that military personnel in India in adulterous relationships are prosecuted/discharged. Is this common in other countries?
Click to expand...

It would be called something like "Conduct unbecoming an officer of the xyz military." And, yes, it's a factor in the US military as well ...mostly, but not limited to, officers.

But still, Sam, it's not a "crime", it's just not a good thing to do. I.e, conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. But not a "crime".

But, Sam, that same thing can happen in private companies as well ....conduct unbecoming an officer of the company, etc ...setting poor examples, etc. But just so you know, that wouldn't be listed as the cause of firing ...because that would be discrimination or something, and the company could be sued for ten gazillion dollars.

I'm curious, however, if that was your original point or question, why didn't you just ask it that way instead of the way you did?

Baron Max
 
James R.:

What is your stance on the legality of all marriages, then? Surely, if the government has no right to make a violation of the contract illegal, it doesn't have the right to establish it either? Or to give tax benefits and the like?
 
What is your stance on the legality of all marriages, then? Surely, if the government has no right to make a violation of the contract illegal, it doesn't have the right to establish it either? Or to give tax benefits and the like?
Click to expand...

The government doesn't force people into marriage, so it is wrong to say the government "establishes" marriages. If you view marriage as a "contract" between consenting parties, then the government is not a party to that contract, and it makes perfect sense that an uninterested party should not be able to sue for breach of a contract between others.

What the government does is regulate the ways in which marriages are recognised by the government itself - for example, as you said, tax implications. Clearly, there is little argument these days over the government's right to levy taxes on its citizens or to give tax breaks to encourage certain activities.

The government has made laws regarding what forms of marriage are considered legal, since that impacts the relationship of the parties to the government and to other citizens. Moreover, the government has made laws regarding divorce. The divorce laws exist mostly to prevent extremist religious views being imposed on people who may suffer as a result of being unable to go against such ideas. Reasonable divorce laws have been introduced to prevent people becoming trapped against their will in an unhappy marriage.

Currently, western societies tend to have "no fault" divorce laws, which allow one partner to unilaterally seek to terminate a marriage for any reason, without having to show "fault" or blame in the other partner. One possible reason for a divorce may be infidelity by the other partner, but the law has rightly decided that investigating personal infidelity is no business of the government. It is private matter between the individuals involved.
 
sam, are you drunk? This is a stupid thread.
samcdkey said:
Just wondered if people think it is a crime with with people should be "charged" and expect accountability and why.
Click to expand...
I'm preserving that sentence for posterity, just in case you decide to edit it later. How unusually unintelligible of you. You need to have strong words with the people at quality control - the standard of your many paid stand-ins is seriously deteriorating.
 
I think it shouldn't be a crime, but if a divorce results, the adulter should get squat, or at least should get much less. If they won't honor their commitment, why should they benefit from it?
 
samcdkey said:
Why?
Click to expand...

Adultery should be encouraged, as people are going to cheat no matter what, we should factor it into all marriages and develop formal ways to cheat.

Such as routine STD testing of all potential mistresses or misters. Routine backround checks. All the precautions, and we should encourage open relationships and polyamorous lifestyle for those who cannot handle monogamy.
 
Baron Max said:
It would be called something like "Conduct unbecoming an officer of the xyz military." And, yes, it's a factor in the US military as well ...mostly, but not limited to, officers.

But still, Sam, it's not a "crime", it's just not a good thing to do. I.e, conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. But not a "crime".

But, Sam, that same thing can happen in private companies as well ....conduct unbecoming an officer of the company, etc ...setting poor examples, etc. But just so you know, that wouldn't be listed as the cause of firing ...because that would be discrimination or something, and the company could be sued for ten gazillion dollars.

I'm curious, however, if that was your original point or question, why didn't you just ask it that way instead of the way you did?

Baron Max
Click to expand...


Seems curious to me that military personnel should have less freedom than civilians; aren't they defending the principles we represent?
 
madanthonywayne said:
I think it shouldn't be a crime, but if a divorce results, the adulter should get squat, or at least should get much less. If they won't honor their commitment, why should they benefit from it?
Click to expand...

Commitment is about sex?:confused:
 
samcdkey said:
Seems curious to me that military personnel should have less freedom than civilians;
Click to expand...

That's because a.) you don't know shit about the military or b.) you actually think civilians have freedom or c.) both of the above!

samcdkey said:
...aren't they defending the principles we represent?
Click to expand...

Sam, for a supposedly intelligent, well-educated individual, you sure can post some really stupid questions and statements! How much are your controllers paying you for making these posts at sciforums????

Baron Max
 
(Q) said:
Can't you ever answer a fucking question?
Click to expand...

Sam's whole purpose here is to stir up controversy and intense arguments ....and keep them going when they start!! ...no matter how ridiculous it gets.

I'm convinced that she's/he's a paid propagandist ...probably paid by some radical Islamic group because of the many anti-American and anti-Israeli crap she/he posts! If you pay attention to her/his posts, you'll see.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Sam, for a supposedly intelligent, well-educated individual, you sure can post some really stupid questions and statements! How much are your controllers paying you for making these posts at sciforums????

Baron Max
Click to expand...
?

LMAO!

Do you assume she's a 'commie' Baron? Possibly KGB trying to get you to divulge national secrets?

:rolleyes:
 
samcdkey said:
I'm interested in how people think, whats wrong with that?
Click to expand...

No, Sam ....you do everything in your power to get people into heated arguments ...and stirring up the trouble when it begins. You like to see people fight and argue and sling vile accusations.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
Sam's whole purpose here is to stir up controversy and intense arguments ....and keep them going when they start!! ...no matter how ridiculous it gets.

I'm convinced that she's/he's a paid propagandist ...probably paid by some radical Islamic group because of the many anti-American and anti-Israeli crap she/he posts! If you pay attention to her/his posts, you'll see.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

You're paranoid Baron lol.

Seriously.. really paranoid.
 
Bells said:
Do you assume she's a 'commie' Baron? Possibly KGB trying to get you to divulge national secrets?
Click to expand...

No, not commie .....radical Islamic group(s). And no, it's not about secrets, it's about stirring up the shit around the world and fomenting disagreement and hatred.

Baron Max
 
Baron Max said:
No, Sam ....you do everything in your power to get people into heated arguments ...and stirring up the trouble when it begins. You like to see people fight and argue and sling vile accusations.

Baron Max
Click to expand...

So far, YOU are the only one who has flung anything Baron.

She merely asked a question and commented on your answer. And all of a sudden you start getting all 'uppity' and start aaccusing her of being a "paid propagandist". Do you have actual proof of this Baron?

As a man who always goes against the argument to spice things up, YOU are the last person to talk about her debating techniques. YOU always attempt to get people riled up. And YOU simply don't like it when it's done right back at you.

Now either you have proof of sam being a "paid propagandist", or you are making a spurious and false claim about her. Which is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top