xplnyrslf said:

~laughs~

how well do you know fathermcmeekle xplnyrslf ?

Hmmm....adultery, why the heck bother to get married in the first place if one cannot maintain self control? I'm just sayin'.

Some aftershocks of Adultery:

1. A ruined relationship with our Creator
2. A Broken Marriage/Relationship
3. A Broken and many times displaced Family
4. Mistrust and Disrespect
5. STD's (Sexually Transmitted Diseases)

and these are just a few, NO THANKS.

A little self control goes a long long way.
[Edited 2/18/07 7:59am]

SisterGirl said:

Point by point rebuttal:

1. I am currently in the Middle East, in the middle of a war being fought on three sides (US v. Iraq, Muslim v. Christian, Sunni v. Shia) that for the most part comes down to who's version of God is better, so when I strayed, my relationship to the creator wasn't a huge consideration...that and the fact that I'm Catholic and our heavenly representatives are partial to little boys kinda relieves them of the holier than thou act....

2, 3 and 4. Broken marriages and relationships can be fixed...adultery isn't the death knell that everyone thinks it is....you just have to be honest with yourself and deal with things upfront...when you deal with the act itself, all of the possible excuses why you did it tend to pale in relevance....if the transgressed party is serious about reconciliation, then they have to be willing to at some point in the proceedings let go of the anger...and if the cheater is serious about wanting to reconcile, they have to understand that their sig-other is PISSED and hurt and betrayed...in other words, don't get mad because they're mad....you are up to your neck in it because you got yourself up to your neck in it, so DEAL WITH IT!!

5. Any IDIOT who is cheating and doesn't take the proper precautions deserves a bit of drippy-c*#k or any other disease they contract....or whatever strange bundle of joy is created from the illicit union...

again, NONE of us is so perfectly human that we can predict one moment to the next...if it were simply a matter of self control, then our society wouldn't have the issues that we deal with....to me, the full exercise of free will isn't denying its existance...its dealing with the consequences of that will...as in do what you feel is best for you at that time, but be ready to deal with the consequences of your actions...because everything you do, good or bad, has consequences at some level.....

reneGade20 said:

Thank you Renegade. Not that I'm not sorry for what I did but SisterGirl's post was kinda ridiculous to me.

IrresistibleB1tch said:

Fancy a beer?

fathermcmeekle said:

liquor is quicker!

IrresistibleB1tch said:

That's what I am talking about....we really need to meet up for a drink girl!

In my mind, the damaging part is the deception, not the sex. But, that's me.
I think it's important to recognize that everybody has their own negotiations in their relationships, there are no universal rights and wrongs here.

People make mistakes, for all kinds of reasons. The question -- the thing that reveals their character -- is, how did they handle it? Did they lie about it? Are they taking responsibility for the pain they caused?

It's tough, because people know how they're SUPPOSED to feel, right? The cheater is supposed to feel like the scum of the Earth, the cheatee is supposed to feel totally broken and outraged, friends are supposed to pick a side. . . I don't like it. I think people have to look at the individual situation and go, "ok, now what?"

But the early stages don't have to about denying ...and the second relationships don't have to be about deception.

If you hold the principle that individuals are free and bonds are voluntary and by choice (not forced exclusivity) then you'd be likely to have set open rules with your marriage partner ...or if there's a sudden situation that has arisen, sit down and discuss your new needs.


Either you believe humans are complex and need multiple partners for stimulation or not. If you don't believe that, don't commit 'adultery' -- you're a weak hypocrite.

If you believe that .. you have NOTHING to lie about...you're fulfilling your basic relationship principles that should have already been discussed before the anchor relationship was set. That way, side relationships can be held with reverence not guilt.

I know many people who have had healthy mistress-wife relationships (my father did for two decades before his mistress passed away) and signifcant other/husband relationships for years.


I know some say ...don't get married. But marriage has a lot of strategic benefits. And who's to say after marrying, you'll ever find someone inspiring enough to require a second relationship? YOu could very well lead a monagamous life forever. But there should always be a clause ... I think I read Will and Jada have this ...and they appear to have a very solid marriage.


In our society, monagamy is lifted as the ideal ...but it's not the core family relationship everywhere. There are many cultures where having multiple relationships are encouraged.

Again, I'm talking about more than cheating for sex and due to a lack of self control. HUmans are very complex. That's all I'm saying.

No one person can be everything to anybody -- without one of them stifling, pretending, or giving up their needs to follow someone else's path.
[Edited 2/18/07 10:31am]

But the early stages don't have to about denying ...and the second relationships don't have to be about deception.

If you hold the principle that individuals are free and bonds are voluntary and by choice (not forced exclusivity) then you'd be likely to have set open rules with your marriage partner ...or if there's a sudden situation that has arisen, sit down and discuss your new needs.


Either you believe humans are complex and need multiple partners for stimulation or not. If you don't believe that, don't commit 'adultery' -- you're a weak hypocrite.

If you believe that .. you have NOTHING to lie about...you're fulfilling your basic relationship principles that should have already been discussed before the anchor relationship was set. That way, side relationships can be held with reverence not guilt.

I know many people who have had healthy mistress-wife relationships (my father did for two decades before his mistress passed away) and signifcant other/husband relationships for years.


I know some say ...don't get married. But marriage has a lot of strategic benefits. And who's to say after marrying, you'll ever find someone inspiring enough to require a second relationship? YOu could very well lead a monagamous life forever. But there should always be a clause ... I think I read Will and Jada have this ...and they appear to have a very solid marriage.


In our society, monagamy is lifted as the ideal ...but it's not the core family relationship everywhere. There are many cultures where having multiple relationships are encouraged.

Again, I'm talking about more than cheating for sex and due to a lack of self control. HUmans are very complex. That's all I'm saying.

No one person can be everything to anybody -- without one of them stifling, pretending, or giving up their needs to follow someone else's path.
[Edited 2/18/07 10:31am]

SynthiaRose said:

It sounds to me like you're talking about an open relationship/marriage there's maybe one percent of the population that can honestly handle that type of relationship mentally and emotionally.

SynthiaRose said:

I think that what you outline is ideal....and idealistic at the same time....because no matter the situation, an arrangement like that doesn't last or work for one or the other partner....

or you run the risk of the mistress imposing her own "importance" into the mix...considering herself as "number one wife" or whatever...which completely undermines the arrangement....bottom line, for all the talk in these situations, everyone eventually comes to the point of primacy, of wanting to be the sole inspiration for that other person...extra marital affairs require a certain level of detachment, of placement...that most participants aren't willing to concede....meanwhile, the "cheater" ends up being the asshole who wants to have his cake and the means to eat it too....

NAnomaly said:

Maybe. I haven't really defined it. When I think of open relatinships it makes me think of people who are always scouting for others and never exclusive at any point in the relationship. I don't like that.

I'm really talking about a conditionally exclusive relatinship that could expand to accommodate an additional person out of necessity and hopefully only temporarily.

Let me use an example. My favorite writer-philosopher is Ayn Rand. She and her husband Frank loved each other very much. HOwever, she met someone during a time when work on one of her novels was stalled. She was in a creative slump. This person inspired her. She sat down with her husband and the man's husband and made an arrangement for an affair. This affair allowed Ayn, the theory and legend go, to complete her masterpiece Atlas Shrugged (which hopefully will be produced as a movie with Angelina Jolie starring. That was the world last fall).

Anyway, she still loved Frank and was with him til death parted them. (but yes Frank was very hurt by her well-publicized affair).

I'm not married ...( I have shared relationships with married men and have had one of my boyfriends cheat on me )I just know that if I were to get married -- my partner and I would need to understand that we have to work hard to stimulate each other and if our paths diverge in some area where another person might be more stimulating than the relationship would have to accommodate that for a temporary phase at least.

I would always want the anchor relationship to remain in tact.

I think this understanding forces married people to work on being at their peak, to never stop growing or evolving.

Don't just be married, deterioriting or stagnating into your worse self and expect the other person to still be intrigue fully and completely so that all their needs are met.

They don't owe you any favors. They have to live for them. We get one life. And each person is a new world.

NAnomaly said:

Maybe. I haven't really defined it. When I think of open relatinships it makes me think of people who are always scouting for others and never exclusive at any point in the relationship. I don't like that.

I'm really talking about a conditionally exclusive relatinship that could expand to accommodate an additional person out of necessity and hopefully only temporarily.

Let me use an example. My favorite writer-philosopher is Ayn Rand. She and her husband Frank loved each other very much. HOwever, she met someone during a time when work on one of her novels was stalled. She was in a creative slump. This person inspired her. She sat down with her husband and the man's husband and made an arrangement for an affair. This affair allowed Ayn, the theory and legend go, to complete her masterpiece Atlas Shrugged (which hopefully will be produced as a movie with Angelina Jolie starring. That was the world last fall).

Anyway, she still loved Frank and was with him til death parted them. (but yes Frank was very hurt by her well-publicized affair).

I'm not married ...( I have shared relationships with married men and have had one of my boyfriends cheat on me )I just know that if I were to get married -- my partner and I would need to understand that we have to work hard to stimulate each other and if our paths diverge in some area where another person might be more stimulating than the relationship would have to accommodate that for a temporary phase at least.

I would always want the anchor relationship to remain in tact.

I think this understanding forces married people to work on being at their peak, to never stop growing or evolving.

Don't just be married, deterioriting or stagnating into your worse self and expect the other person to still be intrigue fully and completely so that all their needs are met.

They don't owe you any favors. They have to live for them. We get one life. And each person is a new world.

SynthiaRose said:

interesting....

...for me, though, having been "up to my neck in it", in most cases, people's own hangups would crush the arrangement....because many people can't handle not being their sig-other's sole inspiration...I agree that such an arrangement, in principle, would motivate couples to continually work at keeping their relationships vital instead of getting settled into the stagnance that eventually creeps into long term relationships...

well said, though, in any event....

I think adultry is cause by the egotistic but natural desire to find someone in your lifetime that craves you and hungers to create YOUR ultimate pleasure and provides it for you in a way you fear you're missing out on.

very true most significate others can't handle the the thought of outside inspiration.

NAnomaly said:

True....at the same time, most "outside inspirations" can't handle not being the sole inspiration after a while....[i]nor can they handle the idea that the time comes for outside inspiration to cease being necessary.[/i]...

NAnomaly said:

True....at the same time, most "outside inspirations" can't handle not being the sole inspiration after a while....nor can they handle the idea that the time comes for outside inspiration to cease being necessary....

I think adultry is cause by the egotistic but natural desire to find someone in your lifetime that craves you and hungers to create YOUR ultimate pleasure and provides it for you in a way you fear you're missing out on.

OMG. Been there. And very true.

ufoclub said:

I almost agree: It is both egoistic and natural :yep: ...but I want someone who IS my ultimate pleasure ..not just CREATING themselves to be as you say...in order to pander to me.

The rush, the high is the thought that the universe has crafted this true soul mate ...not some pandering poseur.


Why is this topic all of a sudden depressing me? Maybe secretly I do want something exclusive But I stand by my principles!!

reneGade20 said:

Thank you Renegade. Not that I'm not sorry for what I did but SisterGirl's post was kinda ridiculous to me.

SisterGirl said:

Point by point rebuttal:

1. I am currently in the Middle East, in the middle of a war being fought on three sides (US v. Iraq, Muslim v. Christian, Sunni v. Shia) that for the most part comes down to who's version of God is better, so when I strayed, my relationship to the creator wasn't a huge consideration...that and the fact that I'm Catholic and our heavenly representatives are partial to little boys kinda relieves them of the holier than thou act....

2, 3 and 4. Broken marriages and relationships can be fixed...adultery isn't the death knell that everyone thinks it is....you just have to be honest with yourself and deal with things upfront...when you deal with the act itself, all of the possible excuses why you did it tend to pale in relevance....if the transgressed party is serious about reconciliation, then they have to be willing to at some point in the proceedings let go of the anger...and if the cheater is serious about wanting to reconcile, they have to understand that their sig-other is PISSED and hurt and betrayed...in other words, don't get mad because they're mad....you are up to your neck in it because you got yourself up to your neck in it, so DEAL WITH IT!!

5. Any IDIOT who is cheating and doesn't take the proper precautions deserves a bit of drippy-c*#k or any other disease they contract....or whatever strange bundle of joy is created from the illicit union...

again, NONE of us is so perfectly human that we can predict one moment to the next...if it were simply a matter of self control, then our society wouldn't have the issues that we deal with....to me, the full exercise of free will isn't denying its existance...its dealing with the consequences of that will...as in do what you feel is best for you at that time, but be ready to deal with the consequences of your actions...because everything you do, good or bad, has consequences at some level.....

reneGade20 said:

in other words when they no longer need nor want them but still something to remember.
[Edited 2/18/07 11:51am]

NAnomaly said:

Thats a fatalistic way of looking at things....for me, its more the idea of Grand Central Station....you rode the same intriguing train for a spell...but the time comes for seperate journeys....the ride was special....magical even...but eventually, if the destination isn't the same, then you have to get on a different train....doesn't diminish the journey, it just ends it...

IMHO....

reneGade20 said:

Ideally that would be so in a perfect world but unfortunately we don't live in one and everyone will not always see it that way particularly when dealing with imperfect people to begin with. No it doesn't diminish the journey just tints it.

NAnomaly said:

Hence why I prefaced my comment with "for me"....I realize that everyone won't see it that way, but in the end, someone has to make the move to another train....so to speak....