Why? It is the adulterer who wrecks a home. Hence the term home wrecker.
Itâs also the adulterer who put desire over children too.
Iâll provide an adequate response later.
More or less, raising offspring is a precious commodity within life. Yes, wrecking a marriage can emotionally traumatize a child. However the damage inflicted is secondary in nature.
No damage is associated with the direct act of sex at the time.
Agreed, however to instil a penalty of âyou lose out, you donât get to watch your child grow upâ seems extreme to me.
I think adultery is a shitty, shitty thing to do, but I donât think it is/should be a crime. Legislature should be based upon direct ramifications associated with an act, not my perceived sense of morality.
As an example, Iâd probably lose a lot of respect for you as an individual had you cheated on your wife (depending on the circumstances, some marriages are doomed from the get-go). On the other hand, I wouldnât advocate for your children to be taken away, or for you to lose a large portion of your hard earned money.
Thanks.
Also something else comes to mind. I donât think itâs unreasonable to think that those against punishment for adultery raise suspicion. I mean, after all, in these conversations I feel like asking, âHmm, why would you mind? Do you want to cheat? Do you want the opportunity to, just in case?â
Same goes for the concern about recreational drugs. âDo you want to use them? If not, why do you mind if there are laws against them?â
In what regard or perception is it moral? Secondly ruining a home for children Is both a moral and life quality issue considering such traumatic events can ruin a childâs trajectory in life.
The other person loses out in many cases too, with money and time.
Due to the downstream consequences associated with laws against them. Weâve been through this, the outcome associated with excess policing over this issue within modern, secular societies tends to be higher rates of overdose, STI transmission (needle Bourne disease), contaminated product that people take anyway, high rates of incarceration/criminal records incurred and thus reduced career opportunity over some stupid decision you made at the age of 16.
They just did a massive inquiry (billions of dollars) in NSW over the methamphetamine epidemic. It was ascertained the best way to gain control over this pandemic wrecking havok upon our society is
- decriminalisation
- enhance public education
- pill testing/safe consumption centres
- abolish sniffer dogs/excess policing
There was also the recommendation if I recall correctly to legalise soft drugs like cannabis and MDMA as criminal syndicates make an absolute fortune through selling these.
No, Iâd never do this. It goes against my engrained moral fundamentals. Still⊠I donât believe it should be a crime
I believe MDMA should be effectively legalised under a certain regulatory framework, but Iâve never taken MDMA. I believe heroin possession ought to be decriminalised to an extent (civil penalty over criminal penalty. I also believe in safe injecting sites), doesnât mean I want to use heroin. It appears these sites increase the rate by which individuals seek out help regarding their addiction. At these sites access to rehab/detox centres is easier to come by as the info is consistently âin your faceâ.
Compare this to shooting up with an unsterile needle and potentially overdosing unsupervised in a dingy alleyway
I believe abortion should be legal under almost any context, I donât want to go out and knock up a girlâŠ
I donât believe smoking should be illegal (and it isnât) despite it being literally the most preventable cause of cancer, cardiovascular disease and premature death in the world (accounting for the majority of all drug related deaths)⊠Guess I want to go pick up a pack or Marlboroâs tonight.
Perhaps this is a crude question, and although Iâve tried my best to remain appropriate here, Iâm simply going to ask bluntly: Do you know that practically no one who wants a solid, talented, standup family and a healthy environment gives a ratâs ass about Such prioritization and coddling? Pretty much no one!
I think that cheaters have everything stacked in their favor. Once upon a time it was considered a crime of passion if someone sought out retribution for being cheated upon.
If you assaulted or even killed the perpetrator/s you were basically let off because an extremely violent reaction was considered normal and reasonable. I donât think human nature has changed but laws in most places have.
A wronged party law would at least alleviate some of that potential for a violent reaction because the perpetrator/s will have to pay(literally) for their actions. The spouse who was wrong will at least come out of it, not only morally in the right, but also with a legal win.
1 Like
This isnât a question. This is a statement youâve made.
Itâs not prioritisation/coddling, itâs the reduction of death, diminishing profits made by criminals, reducing public burden associated with a failed âwar on drugsâ (and this is me being a broken record) wherein many substances one may be given a jail sentence for are intrinsically less damaging than alcohol/tobacco.
Current legislature isnât steeped in scientific fact, rather dated preconceived notions. Drug legislature/reform isnât a priority, although I do believe it is an issue. We have far more pressing societal issues to deal with. But look at the incarceration rate in the USA, many people are locked up over nonviolent drug offences.
Imagine itâs your child who makes a rash decision to take a pill at a festival. Heâs caught, given a criminal record thus dashing his hopes for a career in law, sciences etc. Youâd think this would serve as a preventative measure⊠But alas, no. People generally disregard the law/take risks within these situations.
In the grand scheme of things, we have far more pressing societal issues to deal with.
1 Like
I should have repeated that I donât think people who use drugs here and there should be put away, but rather large scale distributors. I donât think the solution is legalization.
I donât believe thereâs been an actual war on drugs
Agreed on the first front. As to the second front I think it depends.
Soft substances like cannabis I think could be legalised with minimal detriment to society provided blocks on advertising are enforced/regulatory guidelines are akin to alcohol in effort to keep X substance away from children.
Look at what Australia has done with tobacco (plain packaging, ban on advertising, public education campaigns, restricting areas of use etc). I think this would be an acceptable framework to legalise several substances under. Remove the criminal element and minimise use within the populace. This equates to a win/win in my opinion.
There are always caveats to any approach though, we have a large, booming tobacco black market.
As per harder substances. For use/possession I believe civil penalties and/or referral for treatment may be preferable to imposing criminal sanctions.
Some 20,000 dead people in the Phillipines and millions incarcerated/previously incarcerated within the USA would disagree with you
Good thing this is no longer the case. Imagine I murder my neighbour tomorrow. Upon interrogation I simply say âwell, he slept with my GFâ
Detective: âwell shit, youâre good to go son. Sorry this happened to you.â
Adultery certainly isnât an apt excuse to take a human life. Human life is an under valued commodity within this world.
Are some people in this thread even aware that what they push for causes the end of it?
2 Likes
Are we referring to abortion or potential ramifications associated as secondary consequence from adultery (i.e suicide). Or premature death associated with drug use, growing up poor/within the confines of a broken home.
As per abortion, it depends what we consider a fully formed human life. Hence my argument would be âabortion prior to X stage in my opinion doesnât equate to the taking of a human lifeâ.
And youâd say
âYes it doesâ
Then Iâd reply
âNo it doesnâtâ
And youâd reply
âYes it doesâ
And itâd be put on repeat like a broken record until we agree to disagree.
Instead we have a system where the wronged party has no way to redress the wrong, despite them being morally in the right. They usually end up losing their marriage, the house, the kids, basically their whole way of life. The perpetrators do the wrong thing, with impunity and get rewarded. Freedom with no responsibility.
What if instead of turning the anger towards the perpetrators and seeking revenge, he implodes inwardly and commits suicide because his life has been destroyed. Once again its a too bad so sad situation attitude from the rest of society. Everyone else goes on with their life and the dead guy is never given a second thought.
Human relationships have become so devalued, and this is reflected and reinforced in many modern laws. Older laws from Judeo-Christian, Islamic and Hindu cultures, that punished infidelity with death and are considered barbaric in our age. Whilst our current laws might not be considered barbaric, they are certainly immoral, and self destructive of a healthy society.
1 Like
I can anecdotally perceive this and understand the frustration you harbour. I am not married, nor am I in a commited relationship. That being said I have been wronged time and time again by a cohort of individuals of whom I initially thought were my friends. As a result these people have been left to prosper whilst Iâve been tossed aside with complete disregard for my individualistic health and wellbeing. Outside of this group, no one else appears to have given these interactions a second thought.
Within our current societal paradigm, friendship and peer to peer bonding is a commodity lacking in substance. Interactions between the youth demographic are primarily superficial in nature, when the going gets tough and/or situations cater towards a narrative inconsistent with out exact needs/desires we all appear to back out/advocate for ourselves as opposed to helping those desperately in need
This is more or less what happened to me (well the slow deterioration/implosion was a result of being treated terrible + a co-host of other variables that make up the shit-sandwhich that is 2020).
Still, I donât desire revenge towards those who have wronged me. I was blatantly wronged (numerous times), but who am I to act as judge, jury and executioner; theoretically handing out fines/penalties towards those who have emotionally tormented me?
Had I gone out and fought the person/persons whoâd wronged me I believe I would have been in the wrong simply because doing so is escalates a non-violent situation into a violent one.
Itâd be a nice plus if karma played out in my favour though.
I never wrapped my head around this question. Who am I to judge? The question alone reminds me of a lack of a survival or protective instinct, true or not.
1 Like
This has nothing to do with judgement. At the point wherein I inflict harm towards someone else over perceived wrongdoing I am taking the health/wellbeing of someone else into my own hands.
I am not an officer of the law, I am not a judge etc. I lack the necessary qualifications required to legally detain and/or penalise someone.
Generally speaking aside from select special circumstances I believe fighting, resorting to violence and enacting revenge over an emotion based response is a juvenile thing to do.
Itâs probably not worth your time, and the result of these altercations isnât a âwinâ or âloseâ scenario⊠The result is almost always âwho ends up getting hurt the mostâ (be it physically or emotionally).
There is substance to this argument. If an action doesnât harm anyone at all aside from perhaps the individual at hand, then who are you to judge? A crude example would be nail biting. I bite my nails when I get anxious. It wouldnât be your prerogative/business to continually give me shit about biting my nails.
If I want to bite my nails, who cares? It isnât adversely affecting anyone besides PERHAPS myself depending on how extreme the habit is.
When I say âjudgementâ I refer to condescending smears/blanket resentment. Constructive criticism differs from this. If you were to say something like âhave you tried chewing gumâ Iâd give it thought and be appreciative. On the other hand telling me how gross it is and how itâs such a terrible habit/how Iâll never get a date is crossing acceptable boundaries (in my opinion).
Many instances escalating things will just cause trouble for you down the line(legally). I think the sociopathic types also look for people that they think wonât retaliate. They know most people wonât stand up to them, it reinforces their bad behavior,so they keep doing it unless someone does something about it. It can be real hard when people you think you can trust screw you over. Learn from it if you can, and donât make the same mistake with those people again.
Karma, I donât know whether I believe in it or not, but people who are arseholes all the time eventually piss the wrong person off. You canât rely on it, but it certainly is sweet when someone who has wronged you gets their just desserts.
I hope things swing around in your favor a bit more next year.
3 Likes