No Valid Defense/Excuse for Adultery ... EVER ....

[Rusha]

Well, I get your drift but it's not always as simple as that for people. I think there's shades of grey on the subject although not fifty...

The vow is to be faithful to your spouse. I completely agree that people can fall out of love or even get to the point at where regardless of love, the relationship is toxic. However, the only person I can speak for is myself in stating that I would not allow myself to go outside of my standards due to my emotional state. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[Right Divider]

Conscience and common sense. I don't need some "rulebook" to tell me that torturing an animal is wrong by way of. You?

Define conscience and common sense. Why do SO many people not seem to have these things?

 

[Right Divider]

What needs to be defended? Adultery is wrong, do you agree or not?

On what BASIS do you determine what is right and what is wrong? You are another one with perfect opinion?

 

[Tambora]

What needs to be defended? Adultery is wrong, do you agree or not?

I believe he might be making the point that morality must have it's foundation per the Lord, and not subjective feelings.
Which is probably brought up because Rusha is agnostic.
So the question would be ..... does Rusha base her moral foundation on the Lord, or her own feelings on the matter?
If that wasn't the point, I apologize for butting in.

 

[Rusha]

On what BASIS do you determine what is right and what is wrong? You are another one with perfect opinion?

And still yet, you are incapable of giving your *opinion* by simply answering the question.

 

[Arthur Brain]

The vow is to be faithful to your spouse. I completely agree that people can fall out of love or even get to the point at where regardless of love, the relationship is toxic. However, the only person I can speak for is myself in stating that I would not allow myself to go outside of my standards due to my emotional state. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Yes, it is although the vow doesn't include to put up with abuse further down the line should a relationship turn sour or a partner become controlling etc. I can't accuse someone of being immoral if they've sought intimacy elsewhere in cases like that although that's just my opinion.

 

[Tambora]

Conscience and common sense. I don't need some "rulebook" to tell me that torturing an animal is wrong by way of. You?

But does conscience and common sense tell you to tell a woman to stay with a man that beats her up?
(Granted, she is not committing adultery just by leaving him, and Rusha's point is about committing adultery.)

 

[CabinetMaker]

On what BASIS do you determine what is right and what is wrong? You are another one with perfect opinion?

Is it your contention that because Rusha is agnostic it is not possible for her to right from wrong? If I recall correctly, Rusha is staunchly anti-abortion. Is she wrong about that also because she may use a different basis than you?

 

[Arthur Brain]

On what BASIS do you determine what is right and what is wrong? You are another one with perfect opinion?

No, but you seem to be setting yourself up to be...

lain:

 

[Arthur Brain]

But does conscience and common sense tell you to tell a woman to stay with a man that beats her up?
(Granted, she is not committing adultery just by leaving him, and Rusha's point is about committing adultery.)

No, I've known women who have been in abusive relationships, not physically but psychologically and emotionally and in any case like that I'd encourage people to get out of the relationship regardless of the nature of the abuse. I'm saying it's understandable that people commit adultery in cases like that. Sure, you could argue that it's still immoral but I see more grey areas on the subject.

 

[Right Divider]

And still yet, you are incapable of giving your *opinion* by simply answering the question.

I await some foundation for YOUR claim. Why does this offend you so much?

Justify your original argument with something other than simply your vain opinion.

 

[Rusha]

Yes, it is although the vow doesn't include to put up with abuse further down the line should a relationship turn sour or a partner become controlling etc. I can't accuse someone of being immoral if they've sought intimacy elsewhere in cases like that although that's just my opinion.

I don't have a problem with them being intimate with someone else ... AFTER the divorce is finalized. Also, I do understand and empathize, it's just a matter of timing. I held myself to this standard while I was going through my divorce not because I wasn't lonely or emotional (and very pregnant) but just because it was the right thing to do. I have children and a grandson and will never set the example that "adultery is okay IF".

 

[Right Divider]

Is it your contention that because Rusha is agnostic it is not possible for her to right from wrong? If I recall correctly, Rusha is staunchly anti-abortion. Is she wrong about that also because she may use a different basis than you?

Moral determinations require more than just opinionated claims.

 

[Right Divider]

No, but you seem to be setting yourself up to be...

lain:

"Seem to be".... another vain opinion.

 

[Rusha]

I await some foundation for YOUR claim.

Enjoy your wait. You will not distract from/hijack OR dictate the topic of this discussion. It's my thread. Start your own thread

 

[CabinetMaker]

Moral determinations require more than just opinionated claims.

Society has long held that adultery is wrong. Would agreeing with societal norms be sufficient for you?

 

[Tambora]

No, I've known women who have been in abusive relationships, not physically but psychologically and emotionally and in any case like that I'd encourage people to get out of the relationship regardless of the nature of the abuse. I'm saying it's understandable that people commit adultery in cases like that. Sure, you could argue that it's still immoral but I see more grey areas on the subject.

To commit adultery, she would have to have sex with another man.
So leaving an abusive husband is not adultery in itself.
Now if a woman thinks she can commit adultery because of what her husband does, then she would be wrong.

 

[Right Divider]

Enjoy your wait. You will not distract from OR dictate the topic of this discussion.

I wasn't dictating.

 

[Tambora]

Society has long held that adultery is wrong. Would agreeing with societal norms be sufficient for you?

Heck no, you don't rely on society norms for morality.
Society has abortion as legal.

 

[Right Divider]

Society has long held that adultery is wrong. Would agreeing with societal norms be sufficient for you?

So you think that majority vote is the basis for morality?

Some societies have no problem with adultery, are they wrong?