Would you shag someone else's partner?

[Mikkel]

If you think that I failed to provide sufficient shades of grey in the poll options, then you are obviously not completely averse to facilitating the behaviours of which I speak, and should therefore, if you vote, check either option 2 or option 4.

I may be many things - but I am neither stupid nor naive. But from your wording I could honestly check any of the boxes - depends on how I read the text.

Well, there y'go, then. Just so long as you're not fibbing; I'd prefer it if the poll results reflected reality.

That is my point - it can not reflect reality since it is too simple.

[jrandom]

... passing judgment upon those that does not conform with our personal beliefs of right an wrong.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't see that coming...

The extrapolation that this discussion makes you uncomfortable because:

A. You'd allow a woman to cheat on her partner with you; and

B. You aren't at peace with the fact that many people oppose that particular ethical position,

is a straightforward one.

Might I suggest that you abandon your twitchiness, and just speak freely about why you feel comfortable with something that many others don't?

[ManDownUnder]

So now we've gone from entertaining a grossly simplified discussion of an interesting but complicated subject to passing judgment upon those that does not conform with our personal beliefs of right an wrong.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't see that coming...

Agreed about the discussion but are you saying that the original question about knowing and active involvement in cheating is not something one should pass judgement on?

Check the online definition of guilt:
* the fact or state of having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong, esp. against moral or penal law; culpability

It does break a good number of moral laws depending on the chosen codes of conduct one might ascribe to, and in some places it also breaks criminal law.

Yup - guilty of shagging with gay abandon (sorry carver) or not - that's the question!

[Mikkel]

Didnt he just mean "cheaters aren't gunna fess up in public ?"

It was not aimed at MDU - just at the fact that we have now introduced the word GUILT into the discussion. Guilt is facilitated through judgment between right and wrong and that mindset is inadequate when dealing with subjects like this... IMHO that is.

Personally, I don't give a hoot what other people think about me, hence the fact I'm quite happy to be completely honnest. My conscience is clear, and I sleep very well at night...that's when I'm being left to sleep, of course

Does your partner snore as well?

[ManDownUnder]

Where the hell is Disco Dan anyway? The self proclaimed Master Shagger of married women extra-ordinare is very quiet for some reason...

[Tank]

Where the hell is Disco Dan anyway? The self proclaimed Master Shagger of married women extra-ordinare is very quiet for some reason...

Probably putting in spade work before the husbands knock off work at 5.

[jrandom]

judgment between right and wrong and that mindset is inadequate when dealing with subjects like this... IMHO

Mikkel, stop using weasel words.

Obviously you're cool (given certain preconditions, one presumes) with the idea of shagging a woman behind her partner's back, so why not just explain the situation(s) in which that'd work for you?

Rather than saying "right and wrong is inadequate", show via example that the perception of right and wrong which you disagree with can be inadequate.

[007XX]

Does your partner snore as well?

No, bless his Calvin Klein undies ...we're just in an elongated honeymooning period. One I don't predict will ever stop...if I got any say in the matter

Theory for me: If we're both happy with dinner at home, why bother with take aways?

[Maha]

Probably putting in spade work before the husbands knock off work at 5.

You mean he buries the pets afterwards?

[Mikkel]

The extrapolation that this discussion makes you uncomfortable because:

A. You'd allow a woman to cheat on her partner with you; and

B. You aren't at peace with the fact that many people oppose that particular ethical position,

is a straightforward one.

Might I suggest that you abandon your twitchiness, and just speak freely about why you feel comfortable with something that many others don't?

C. Neither A. nor B. are correct. My objection is founded simply in the fact that my experience (personal or otherwise) suggest that the matter is quite a bit more complicated.
I would have to abandon my integrity in order to claim that I would NEVER be with a woman who was otherwise committed (me being single or not).
That is not the same thing as saying I'd happily tap somebody's girlfriend should the opportunity arise.

The fact that you are happy to throw absolutes around in the way that you do suggest that you are not enough at ease with yourself to consider the subject with an open mind. But that is nothing new - we already concluded that in a similar discussion quite a few months ago.

Agreed about the discussion but are you saying that the original question about knowing and active involvement in cheating is not something one whoudl pass judgement on?

I would aspire to not pass judgment, yes.

Check the online definition of guilt:
* the fact or state of having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong, esp. against moral or penal law; culpability

It does break a good number of moral laws depending on the chosen codes of conduct one might ascribe to, and in some places it also breaks criminal law.

Well, moral values are not absolute. But that is besides the point...

The range of - for lack of a better word with an objective air - other-partner sexual relations is tremendous. You have everything across the span from the hurtful (i.e. cheating) to the actively partner-endorsed (i.e. swinging, orgies, threesomes). My point is that to pass judgment without having 'seen the evidence' and 'heard the witness statements' is narrow-minded.

[Maha]

Theory for me: If we're both happy with dinner at home, why bother with take aways?

Sometimes Sweet and Sour is good for a change....

[007XX]

Sometimes Sweet and Sour is good for a change....

Trust me, things are saucy enough as they are...

[nodrog:Me]

Trust me, things are saucy enough as they are...

is that like the Dolmio grin?

[ManDownUnder]

Rather than saying "right and wrong is inadequate", show via example that the perception of right and wrong which you disagree with can be inadequate.

Classic example, person A has no capacity for sex for whatever reason, medication supressing libido, mental illness, physical disfunction, and the lack of sex is causing hell to the marriage for person B (person A's significant other)

So - does person B break up with person A in order to actually seek out a happy future, or do they honor their committment to person A and make the relationship all it can be, all the while fulfilling their physical needs elsewhere. In which case the only way to maintain the integrity of the relationship is to keep any extramarital gene swapping a secret.

Person A find out and goes troppo. Speaks to person C and gives their side of the story. Person C could quite reasonably arrive at an understanding person A was wronged, despite the fact Person B was actually attempting to do something to preserve what's left of the relationship.

[Maha]

Trust me, things are saucy enough as they are...

I know, I have seen the home video...