Should adultery be made illegal? (Now with correct poll)

[Rik Meleet]

The state has no business in matters of the heart. Period. Full Stop.

 

[CartesianFart]

heart?is this a metaphorical reply?if it is,then that is not the practical answer to a practical problem.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I use that phrase to include anything related to love and (voluntary) sex. That includes gay-marriage, adultery, age-of-consent etc.

The heart in this cases is the affection felt by the adulterer and the person (s)he is making love to, but isn't married to.

 

[CartesianFart]

so ur view is somewhat an moral imparative that u uphold?Kinda like mine in a way.But i disagree that the 'state 'should not get involved.

My viewpoint is that their would be no law,but a constraint of the media of exploiting it.

 

[CartesianFart]

Sometimes Capitalism of the Media go too far in disorderly making profit of bad unhonest conduct.It can wreck a stable nuclear family households

 

[punkbass2000]

Oral contracts generally aren't binding.

I could say that I would give you a million dollars for a sticker and you can't really do anything if I don't.

Only because I would have no proof of the agreement, technically. The fact that it's patentlky absurd and you likely don't have the money would also be major factors. Seriously, it is a binding contract. I have discussed this with a law professor before. When you go to the convenience store and buy something you are, technically, making a binding agreement to pay the stated price in return for the product. When you order food at a restaurant you are not allowed to leave without paying, even if you leave before the food arrives. You have agreed to pay the price listed for the food. This is all technicality, mind you.

 

[Yom]

Argh! The misconceptions here are so infuriating!

Firstly, just because something is illegal does not mean that it is a criminal offense, hence Homie's creation of a new thread. It's illegal to promise to build a house in a week for someone provided that they pay you a specified sum and then not finish in time (breach of contract), but it doesn't mean that it's a criminal act. You will not be arrested. Adultery wouldn't result in adulterers and adulteresses being arrested; rather, it would result in compensation to the other participant(s) of the contract (if the other participant(s) want compensation, and only if the marriage contract includes some sort of monogamy stipulation). Secondly, adultery is illegal so long as the marriage contract includes or implies monogamy, as adultery would breach that contract.


Adultery wouldn't always be illegal, nor would an adulterer in a monogamous relationship go to jail or even necessarily pay compensation (i.e. if the other party doesn't wish it or if the other party also broke the contract in some way).


This isn't a matter of fascism and morality vs. liberalism, but a matter of whether or not to uphold contract law!

 

[bhsup]

This isn't a matter of fascism and morality vs. liberalism, but a matter of whether or not to uphold contract law!

Whereas I think it should be moved to the realm of criminal law with prison sentences, the whole works. If you don't want to go to jail, don't get married then betray your spouse.

 

[Yom]

Whereas I think it should be moved to the realm of criminal law with prison sentences, the whole works. If you don't want to go to jail, don't get married then betray your spouse.

Why should someone go to jail for breaking a contract? Your position is the one that people are equating with fascism; though it's an overly harsh comparison, you are certainly trying to legislate morality, imposing your views on morality on others.

 

[Archbob]

Only because I would have no proof of the agreement, technically. The fact that it's patentlky absurd and you likely don't have the money would also be major factors. Seriously, it is a binding contract. I have discussed this with a law professor before. When you go to the convenience store and buy something you are, technically, making a binding agreement to pay the stated price in return for the product. When you order food at a restaurant you are not allowed to leave without paying, even if you leave before the food arrives. You have agreed to pay the price listed for the food. This is all technicality, mind you.

I've actually also had law class and the majority of oral contracts are not binding in our culture. There are certain things like shopping and eating at a restaurant that are taken as common law(I don't remember the exact term). But something like agreeing and then breaking a date isn't and therefore your oral contract isn't binding.

Not paying at a restaurant and not paying at a store is consider theft whereas breaking a date is not.

 

[Homie]

I think the solution to eliminate some excessment of adultry is tell ur legistlators to censor hollywood,literature,and the electronic and print media of glamorizing the sensationalistic aspect of adultry.It can bring it down alittle.

Good idea. If I could, I would.

To those who say that humans will never stop being adulterous, therefore we should not make it a law, I say that makes no sense. By that logic, nothing should be made illegal because we will never eliminate a crime, we cannot outlaw theft because there will always be people who steal? Illogical.

To those that debate civil/criminal law and the details: I am going about this from a philosophical/ethical point of view, not a technical/judicial one. In my eyes it is bad, like other things that are bad. But other bad things have laws against them, adultery does not. Why is that I ask?

I think people might think "But that is different, that is personal business etc...". I think this is only in your heads, because you have been brought up in a society where it is acceptable. If you were brought up in Israel 2000 years ago, or in a muslim country today; you would think that adultery being illegal and having punishments was perfectly natural.

 

[Rik Meleet]

(..)To those that debate civil/criminal law and the details: I am going about this from a philosophical/ethical point of view, not a technical/judicial one. In my eyes it is bad, like other things that are bad. But other bad things have laws against them, adultery does not. Why is that I ask?

Because making love is a personal thing where the act itself is not a cause for harm. Making love is not illegal.
I can think of many situations where 2 people are married and 1 of them (or both of them) has a sexual relationship with someone else, where absolutely noone is hurt, harmed or whatever. The "anti-adultery-law" would be the bad thing in this case.

I think people might think "But that is different, that is personal business etc...". I think this is only in your heads, because you have been brought up in a society where it is acceptable. If you were brought up in Israel 2000 years ago, or in a muslim country today; you would think that adultery being illegal and having punishments was perfectly natural.

So ?
How does the time I was not born in or the location I do not live at play any role at all?? My love-life is my business and not that of the state, unless I want them to be part of it. Noone is going to forbid me making love to a person, except for me or that person.

 

[Homie]

Because making love is a personal thing where the act itself is not a cause for harm.

No, masterbation is a personal thing, adultery involves atleast 3 people, so it is not a personal thing. And it definately causes harm, even if you can "get over it". You can "get over" your car being stolen, it is still a bad thing.

How does the time I was not born in or the location I do not live at play any role at all??

I was just making the point that people saying it is their personal business is not really an argument at all, because you can say that about anything:
Police officer - Is that a gun and some drugs in your coat?
Perpetrator - That is my personal business!

I demonstrated how the notion of this being personal business and thus something you cannot make a law against is not true. I did this by showing that different cultures in different times in history have had this as a law. So obviously, wheter it is personal or not is only what you (or anyone) think it is, so it can't be made as an argument.

 

[CartesianFart]

Why bother giving solution to the problem of people committing the act of adultry and bother finding out why people commit such selfish behavior based on lust that can be controlled with proper civic instruction?

Its better to smell the rat instead of trying to trap it.

 

[Renata]

Well, should it?
Here is my case for why it should:
1. You entered into a binding contract/pact with your wife. You are breaching the contract if you are unfaithful. So actually adultery is already illegal, it is just not being enforced.
2. Say you are a father and husband. Cheating on your wife could split up the marriage, and definately would harm both your wife and children much more than say; a burglary, mugging or auto-theft, all of which are illegal.

Vote in the poll. And add anything you think is worth adding to the thread.

Breach of contract is generally handled as a civil matter, though, isn't it? Unless maybe the contract involves large sums of money, but then that would probably be some form of theft or larceny instead.

And on top of that -- there is no 'I will be sexually faithful' clause in the marriage license or certificate as far as I know, and it is only the marriage license/certificate that constitutes the legal aspect of a marriage. The rest -- the vows, the promises and so forth, are between you, your wife, and God (or just you and your wife if you are an atheist). Besides, even if that were not the case, there are generally a whole lot of vows in a wedding, including such nebulous things as vowing to love and honor one another. Are people to be brought up on charges if they stop loving their wife or husband?

Finally, a question: am I to assume from the way your phrased you original post that you don't think women ever commit adultery, or that you think they shouldn't be held accountable for it? Because all you mention is men.

 

[punkbass2000]

I've actually also had law class and the majority of oral contracts are not binding in our culture. There are certain things like shopping and eating at a restaurant that are taken as common law(I don't remember the exact term). But something like agreeing and then breaking a date isn't and therefore your oral contract isn't binding.

Not paying at a restaurant and not paying at a store is consider theft whereas breaking a date is not.

Well, I'll agree to disagree. It's not inconceivable that Canadian and American Law might differ here, though I think that's unlikely.

 

[punkbass2000]

To those that debate civil/criminal law and the details: I am going about this from a philosophical/ethical point of view, not a technical/judicial one. In my eyes it is bad, like other things that are bad. But other bad things have laws against them, adultery does not. Why is that I ask?

Because it's emotional and common. Unless you are at least threatening physical harm in some way or doing something cruel and/or unusual, emotional harm is not illegal. I can now, in safety, tell you to get over it. If this hurts your feelings you have no legal recourse. Assuming I'm not disturbing the peace or some such, I can tell people to f off any time I feel like with no fear of legal retribution.

I think people might think "But that is different, that is personal business etc...". I think this is only in your heads, because you have been brought up in a society where it is acceptable. If you were brought up in Israel 2000 years ago, or in a muslim country today; you would think that adultery being illegal and having punishments was perfectly natural.

Indeed. And if I were raised in a society where my first born child was skinned alive on his first birthday as a sacrifice to the gods, I would think that was perfectly normal too. But I wasn't and it's not.

 

[bhsup]

Why should someone go to jail for breaking a contract? Your position is the one that people are equating with fascism; though it's an overly harsh comparison, you are certainly trying to legislate morality, imposing your views on morality on others.

Not really. As long as I can convince most of the population that my position is the right one, it would be imposing society's morality on everyone, not just mine. I've no problem with that at all, and it's certainly not the least bit fascist...talk about a silly comparison.

Oh, and this "legislating morality" phrase just drives me nuts. EVERY law dictating behavior could be read as that. You can't walk down the street naked...hey, legislating morality!

 

[CartesianFart]

Adultry is an cultural problem,that consist of people reasoning that they are not making a major big deal.How do u solve a cultural problem with a sound practical solution that doesnt require law punishing when punishment doesnt always reform the particular individual behavior.Anyone got an answer for the solution with out the oppressiveness of institution of the courts to intervene in such matters?

 

[punkbass2000]

Oh, and this "legislating morality" phrase just drives me nuts. EVERY law dictating behavior could be read as that. You can't walk down the street naked...hey, legislating morality!

Quite true. It would likely be better to say that it legislate morality disparately from typical constitutional interpretations.