|
*****************************************************
Sorry, but you're an example of hypocritical contradiction.
If extra marital affairs are immoral, why would it matter if it's consentual or not?
It's ok as long as it's mutually allowed? That's not a question of morality, that's a case of insecurity.
See above. Don't confuse this further with the word - 'Trust".
Without negating absolution in generalities - if you're looking for a partner to 'fit' your idealism in FSU, I hope you have a lot of 'time' invested in your search.
*****************************************************
It can be hypocritical. It depends on the premise basis of the contention of immorality. If it stems from for example the religious doctrines of Chistianity, you are 100% correct. If it stems rather from the deception and lies that come from betrayal of a spouse, it is not hypocritical. In this case, consent would matter because the basis for the "immorality" is said deception. In such case it is not insecurity but not wanting to be lied to and stabbed in the back.
Reading his statement it seems to me that the issue for him is trust and breaking said trust is immoral.
*****************************************************
Reminds me of a comment about "situational ethics" that one of our Russian women board lawyers made recently.
:sombrero:
*****************************************************
All ethics are situational because life isnt black and white. A major part of ethics is intent vs. outcome. Probably the most easy to understand example of this is killing another human being.
Killing someone is considered unacceptable cross culturally.
But then situations come in. Self defense? Ethical of course. How about a soldier at war? Some will argue either way depending on the war. You hit a guy with your car as hes playing "dodge" in traffic? You certainly didnt do anything unethical. Now change that to a drunk driver hitting a man. Unethical.
The key is finding a mate with your same situational ethical values. At least for the most part.
*****************************************************
It makes me laugh. We got guys who go to the FSU and get wives half their age. Women who are beauty queens and some with awards to show. Yet do they give a plausable explanation why they did it? No. They attack and attack the other guys in the process. Always demeaning them. The truth is about these fellows is they can find America women physically like their wives for one night stands and a fling. But would these early twenties beautiful women marry them? Not a chance. And would these men want them if they would? They know how $crewed up they are. So they go to the FSU to get their wives half their age. Yet they attack attack attack other men and never give a plausable explanation about themselves.
So why do they favor the politics and party of feminists? Why do they stay silent when VAWA is discussed or make excuses for it's excesses? VAWA legislation that sets men up and makes them guilty until they can prove their innocence. Which is a very very difficult thing to do. Why does their man-hatred drip from almost every one of their posts?
To understand that you need to look into their deep dark past. Father issues with their fathers and step fathers when growning up. Homosexual encounters while high on crystal meth or cocaine while looking for a new sexual high. Then the self loathing and the compensation with man-hating that comes later. Hurting another man by breaking up his family? Why that's just a bonus that comes with having sex with his wife!
[quote:a37dd1032c] I wonder how true it is that those who claim the greatest degree of moral integrity are indeed the ones who use such tools protect their weak status? [/quote:a37dd1032c]
A rather mild condition to have when you compare it with the other.
|
