Should adultery be a criminal offense?

[nclib]

I say absolutely not. The state has no business intervening here, though adultery could be used in a civil lawsuit.

[The Dowager Mod]

No. but what i did to my first husband when he cheated is.

[Frodo]

No. but what i did to my first husband when he cheated is.

not to infringe on your privacy, but since my curiosity is aroused, i feel impelled to ask:

what did you do to him?  did you physically castrate him?  what happened?

[Richard]

Yes.

[dazzleman]

No, it should not be a criminal offense.  But it should probably be grounds for a contested divorce.

[The Dowager Mod]

No. but what i did to my first husband when he cheated is.

not to infringe on your privacy, but since my curiosity is aroused, i feel impelled to ask:

what did you do to him?  did you physically castrate him?  what happened?

i broke his nose.

[Frodo]

just to respond to the poll -i agree with nclib.  adultery, while immoral, is not the business of the state, and it has no right to interfere unless invited to do by the parties through the court of law.  while it should be discouraged, it is ultimately a matter between individuals.  the state has no business legislating morality. 

[Gabu]

Not criminal, but the adulterer should not be able to get off completely scot free.

[Richard]

adultery, while immoral, is not the business of the state, and it has no right to interfere unless invited to do by the parties through the court of law.  while it should be discouraged, it is ultimately a matter between individuals.  the state has no business legislating morality. 

The same can be said for duals to the death.

[John Dibble]

No, but it should be grounds for divorce.

[Gabu]

The same can be said for duals to the death.

Personally, if two people consent to a dual to the death, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as long as it's assured that no one else can hurt in the process.

[David S]

The same can be said for duals to the death.

Personally, if two people consent to a dual to the death, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as long as it's assured that no one else can hurt in the process.

I agree with Dibble on the divorce issue, but disagree with Gabu on dueling. Its better to leave that one illegal.

[Gabu]

The same can be said for duals to the death.

Personally, if two people consent to a dual to the death, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as long as it's assured that no one else can hurt in the process.

I agree with Dibble on the divorce issue, but disagree with Gabu on dueling. Its better to leave that one illegal.

Interesting; can I ask why?

[Lunar]

The same can be said for duals to the death.

Personally, if two people consent to a dual to the death, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as long as it's assured that no one else can hurt in the process.

I agree with Dibble on the divorce issue, but disagree with Gabu on dueling. Its better to leave that one illegal.

I would have no problem with it as long as there is some damn good proof that both members consented to the duel and the duel was conducted on the grounds that both members agreed upon.

Pragmatically, it's pretty hard to make sure that one of the members didn't "cheat."  Any system would require reliable observers for both sides as well as witnesses for the actual signing: something that's really not that feasible.

[Bono]

No, but it should be a civil one.

[Ebowed]

The same can be said for duals to the death.

Personally, if two people consent to a dual to the death, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as long as it's assured that no one else can hurt in the process.

I agree with Dibble on the divorce issue, but disagree with Gabu on dueling. Its better to leave that one illegal.

Quite right; death matches should stay illegal.  What if the winner thinks that the person is dead, but turns out to be unconcious and then seriously injured?  Do they let him die, and if not, who pays for the operations?  If he recovers, is he allowed to go and kill the 'winner' later, because the fight was never finished, and not get in trouble for it?

All this aside, why sanction death?  Are we supposed to just let two people beat each other up until one of them's dead?  It's useless killing, and on top of that, it's regressive.

[Bono]

it's regressive.

I'll say this for the last time, "is" does not imply "ought".
Just because something is in a given way today, different from what ti was in the past, doesn't mean that what is now is the best one.

[Bono]

No. but what i did to my first husband when he cheated is.

not to infringe on your privacy, but since my curiosity is aroused, i feel impelled to ask:

what did you do to him?  did you physically castrate him?  what happened?

i broke his nose.

That a girl! 

[Ebowed]

it's regressive.

I'll say this for the last time, "is" does not imply "ought".
Just because something is in a given way today, different from what ti was in the past, doesn't mean that what is now is the best one.

I don't mean 'regressive' in the sense that it's old fashioned and therefore bad; I mean regressive in the sense that it would be a step towards the allowance of murder.  This is what moral relativists want.  I don't use the words 'regressive' and 'progressive' in the same manner that everyone else does.

[2952-0-0]

No. but what i did to my first husband when he cheated is.

not to infringe on your privacy, but since my curiosity is aroused, i feel impelled to ask:

what did you do to him?  did you physically castrate him?  what happened?

i broke his nose.

OUCH!!!

[David S]

The same can be said for duals to the death.

Personally, if two people consent to a dual to the death, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it, as long as it's assured that no one else can hurt in the process.

I agree with Dibble on the divorce issue, but disagree with Gabu on dueling. Its better to leave that one illegal.

Interesting; can I ask why?

Thought you'd never ask.
Lets take an example. Suppose I'm a crack shot with a gun but you've never fired one. Then suppose you do something to piss me off, and I challenge you to a duel. Your options are; walk away and be branded a coward or accept the challenge and face a high probability of getting killed. Lousy choices right?

Dueling brought death to many good men over stupid issues. Its better that it remain illegal.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Adultery should be a criminal offense to the same degree as any other fraud  or contract breaking is.

[minionofmidas]

Ebowed, could you please change your avatar?
Because I just thought for a second there that Ernest was arguing two sides of a debate on the same page!

[MissCatholic]

No it shouldnt be. But you wouldnt want to be the guy who commited it if i was your gf.. o dear you bad bad boy!

[opebo]

Good lord this is nonsensical.  People, monogamy is a big con!  Adultery is normal.