Should i laugh or should i cry...
- Thread starter Rusty Skull
- Start date
welsh
Junkmaster
You are right, it is damaging- it's a terrible for two people who were once in love to go through that experience. Adultery is both a breach of loyalty and of trust, and the infliction of emotional pain on someone close to you. It sucks.
But the problem is usually vested in the marriage itself. Regardless of who's fault it is. There is a principle in our country about the sanctity and the privacy of marriage.
We give married people many rights. They raise the kids as they want, they have a privacy in the bedroom, they can sue for loss of sexual interaction (its called loss of consortium), and they are given legal privileges of silence because of their relationship. They can also exercise the right to disolve the marriage if they wish. Better to go through a divorce than a bad marriage, is the rationale.
Is there an economic cost, you bet.
But that's not the point.
The point is simply that what happens between two married people is between them. You don't have to like them or like what they do. But you should respect the privacy of their marriage.
Frankly I think they Bill and Hillary, have a really messed up marriage, and nothing that I would go through. If I was Hillary I would divorce in a second. But they don't, for whatever reasons, they deal with it.
Marriage is not always about sex, nor is it always fidelity. Marriage is mostly about a partnership between two people, especially the type of friendship they have. And its their right to make that partnership what they want it to be, without anyone else telling them what "it should" be. And if someone should tell them, they have to right to tell them to mind their own business.
You don't know where they have been. You have not walked a mile in their shoes. You are not there to make the choice between what's right or wrong for them. They must make those choices. That's their free will.
You may say that fidelity and faithful sex are part of the marriage that you want. I agree. That's what I believe in too. But that's your personal choice, it need not be theirs.
But you have to come to some humility about these things. To make a marriage is often very difficult and the things a couple accept may be very strange to the outsider. People swing, people have open marriages. In some marriage one person loses an interest in sex, and the other goes outside of the marriage for satisfaction. In some situations a person discovers they are gay but don't want to give up what they got. In some situations one or the other has difficulty controlling their sexual urges, and the marriage may go through some very strange times to deal with that.
What two people experience in the process of marriage is usually a surprise. You normally don't know what you will get into until you are there. Happily, many of the surprises are pleasant, but not all.
Matters of sexuality are some of the most private issues a person faces, in many ways it defines what that person is. In marriage, the union of those two people they adjust, and the sex plays a big role.
People change during marriage too. Its not surprising that divorces are often highest in the 20-30 category - when people are going through the most difficult changes as they become adult. They get married, quickly, fuck up, and then get divorced. Usually they marry again and this time it usually lasts- because people also learn. I don't know why Bill and Hillary got married, but I think their marriage is based on different issues than when they got hitched in the first place.
Again, I am not saying you have to like it. I'm also not saying you have to accept it in your marriage. I wouldn't accept adultry- I don't care what the rest of society does. Its a matter of individual private choice. Marriage is a seperate thing from the rest of society or what society does. Just like no one has the right to tell you what "should be" the nature of your marriage.
But- it is a social fact that adultery is rampant in this country. Its rampant in most countries. Its probably vested in the fact that most people want to add some excitement in their lives.
Its also a social fact that almost all marriages go through periods of strain and difficulty.
People lie, no crime, people cheat, no crime. People steal- its a crime. You assault someone, you're dangerous. You screw someone besides your wife, you are an adulteror, but its not a crime. And they don't get crucified for it.
Your marriage is your concern, their's should be left to them.
Its not your business. YOu make your choice, they make theirs. That you don't like, doesn't matter.
You make a commitment, you keep it. Great. You should. But you can't expect others to do so. Law isn't that way. The law often has to make the best with what's it got and deal with it, and if it tries to impose values on a society that isn't ready for them, it will fail.
Yes it sucks.
You know why those girls in Afghanistan wore those elaborate head cages around their head, or why you can't see any part of their body? To avoid adultery. ANd yet it doesn't work. THat's what happens when you try to impose values on other people's marriages.
But, when you consider that most divorces have to do more with money than with sex than you have another issue- maybe our divorce rates are also related to our economy as well.
So back off. I mean really, why do we care about Bill and Hillary's marriage. Keep your eye on the ball- when its the president- its the economy that matters, its the quality of our government.
But the problem is usually vested in the marriage itself. Regardless of who's fault it is. There is a principle in our country about the sanctity and the privacy of marriage.
We give married people many rights. They raise the kids as they want, they have a privacy in the bedroom, they can sue for loss of sexual interaction (its called loss of consortium), and they are given legal privileges of silence because of their relationship. They can also exercise the right to disolve the marriage if they wish. Better to go through a divorce than a bad marriage, is the rationale.
Is there an economic cost, you bet.
But that's not the point.
The point is simply that what happens between two married people is between them. You don't have to like them or like what they do. But you should respect the privacy of their marriage.
Frankly I think they Bill and Hillary, have a really messed up marriage, and nothing that I would go through. If I was Hillary I would divorce in a second. But they don't, for whatever reasons, they deal with it.
Marriage is not always about sex, nor is it always fidelity. Marriage is mostly about a partnership between two people, especially the type of friendship they have. And its their right to make that partnership what they want it to be, without anyone else telling them what "it should" be. And if someone should tell them, they have to right to tell them to mind their own business.
You don't know where they have been. You have not walked a mile in their shoes. You are not there to make the choice between what's right or wrong for them. They must make those choices. That's their free will.
You may say that fidelity and faithful sex are part of the marriage that you want. I agree. That's what I believe in too. But that's your personal choice, it need not be theirs.
But you have to come to some humility about these things. To make a marriage is often very difficult and the things a couple accept may be very strange to the outsider. People swing, people have open marriages. In some marriage one person loses an interest in sex, and the other goes outside of the marriage for satisfaction. In some situations a person discovers they are gay but don't want to give up what they got. In some situations one or the other has difficulty controlling their sexual urges, and the marriage may go through some very strange times to deal with that.
What two people experience in the process of marriage is usually a surprise. You normally don't know what you will get into until you are there. Happily, many of the surprises are pleasant, but not all.
Matters of sexuality are some of the most private issues a person faces, in many ways it defines what that person is. In marriage, the union of those two people they adjust, and the sex plays a big role.
People change during marriage too. Its not surprising that divorces are often highest in the 20-30 category - when people are going through the most difficult changes as they become adult. They get married, quickly, fuck up, and then get divorced. Usually they marry again and this time it usually lasts- because people also learn. I don't know why Bill and Hillary got married, but I think their marriage is based on different issues than when they got hitched in the first place.
Again, I am not saying you have to like it. I'm also not saying you have to accept it in your marriage. I wouldn't accept adultry- I don't care what the rest of society does. Its a matter of individual private choice. Marriage is a seperate thing from the rest of society or what society does. Just like no one has the right to tell you what "should be" the nature of your marriage.
But- it is a social fact that adultery is rampant in this country. Its rampant in most countries. Its probably vested in the fact that most people want to add some excitement in their lives.
Its also a social fact that almost all marriages go through periods of strain and difficulty.
People lie, no crime, people cheat, no crime. People steal- its a crime. You assault someone, you're dangerous. You screw someone besides your wife, you are an adulteror, but its not a crime. And they don't get crucified for it.
Your marriage is your concern, their's should be left to them.
Its not your business. YOu make your choice, they make theirs. That you don't like, doesn't matter.
You make a commitment, you keep it. Great. You should. But you can't expect others to do so. Law isn't that way. The law often has to make the best with what's it got and deal with it, and if it tries to impose values on a society that isn't ready for them, it will fail.
Yes it sucks.
You know why those girls in Afghanistan wore those elaborate head cages around their head, or why you can't see any part of their body? To avoid adultery. ANd yet it doesn't work. THat's what happens when you try to impose values on other people's marriages.
But, when you consider that most divorces have to do more with money than with sex than you have another issue- maybe our divorce rates are also related to our economy as well.
So back off. I mean really, why do we care about Bill and Hillary's marriage. Keep your eye on the ball- when its the president- its the economy that matters, its the quality of our government.
welsh
Junkmaster
The point being this, regardless of whether you think its right or wrong, maybe you should be minding your business when it comes to other people's marriages and worry about the important things from president- like why is he screwing up the economy or the state of our political order.
Which you would absolve him- or didn't you read that one?
Which you would absolve him- or didn't you read that one?
welsh
Junkmaster
Gwydion said:
Gwydion, I need to sleep. Good night.
welsh
Junkmaster
Nada! The issue was one of focus. One should be more concerned about the president as a political leader and economic regulator than who he sleeps with.
[PCE]el_Prez
Vault Fossil
now your getting into shit weve already talked about.......
go to the top of page 2
It's all about what you think is important, personally, I'd like to know the person who is controlling the actions of a person(Including whether they go to war or not, and whether or not to outlaw gay marriages(He said he was consulting lawyers on that...)), KNOWS what he is doing, and doesn't just base his decisions on his own religious beliefs(Which is what he did in the case of gay marriage) or grudges(Which may be what he did in the case of Iraq). However, I respect taht someone would find it more important that that person is faithful to his wife...
Gwydion said:
Bush's bad handling of USA's problems are more important than Clinton's infidelity.
Methinks that was the main point being made.
Briosafreak
Lived Through the Heat Death
Kharn said:
See? Not hard to understand when we`re trying to .
In future president is going to be eithar trained monkey or Hulk Hogan.
welsh
Junkmaster
What- Ronald Reagan or Arnold Schwarzeneggar?
There was a great bit on Arnold on Conan O'Brien. "I am the Governator! I am a legislative killing machine!"
There was a great bit on Arnold on Conan O'Brien. "I am the Governator! I am a legislative killing machine!"
Arnie is the probably the best choice betwen porn star,porn movie king,aliens disguised as humans and other hideous freaks of nature.
welsh
Junkmaster
Well if Jessie "the Body" Ventura can be governor of Wisconsin, Ronbo Reagan can make president of the US, then I think Arnie- the Governator, has a fair chance for governmor.
One thing you can say for the guy- he comes for Austria with almost nothing, and has become very successful, even before movies. Arnie might look and act like a big dumb lug, but he's got brains. And the idea that someone from outside the political machines might take over and clean house, might not be bad.
The problem is the recall itself. The idea that you can depose a sitting governor merely because right now his state is suffering and going through a period of hard times, just doesn't sit. An executive often needs a period of time insulated from public pressure to carry out reforms as needed.
During times of reform, people sometimes lose jobs or suffer, at least temporarily and in the short-term, but in the long-term everyone is better off. However, if a governor is subject to public pressure and recall, then he might be unwilling to take the difficult reforms necessary for long term growth.
Oh, and I like the movie Total Recall- probably Arnies best- except for the last bit.
One thing you can say for the guy- he comes for Austria with almost nothing, and has become very successful, even before movies. Arnie might look and act like a big dumb lug, but he's got brains. And the idea that someone from outside the political machines might take over and clean house, might not be bad.
The problem is the recall itself. The idea that you can depose a sitting governor merely because right now his state is suffering and going through a period of hard times, just doesn't sit. An executive often needs a period of time insulated from public pressure to carry out reforms as needed.
During times of reform, people sometimes lose jobs or suffer, at least temporarily and in the short-term, but in the long-term everyone is better off. However, if a governor is subject to public pressure and recall, then he might be unwilling to take the difficult reforms necessary for long term growth.
Oh, and I like the movie Total Recall- probably Arnies best- except for the last bit.
Hey, Arnold got his degree in UWS (University of Wisconin - Superior), so you just know that he's very intelligent if he got his education in Wisconsin!
Um, yes, it's California, so I think that the wackier the govenor is, the better he'll be able to work for his/her even wackier citizens.
Um, yes, it's California, so I think that the wackier the govenor is, the better he'll be able to work for his/her even wackier citizens.