Adultery (was: Norm Coleman's interesting family situation)

H. Curtiss Leung hncl at panix.com
Thu Nov 21 09:39:12 PST 2002


Luke wrote:


> It's not about sex. It's about deceit. And hypothetical persons have no
> need for privacy, Budge.

As long as we're talking hypotheticals, adultery does not necessarily entail deceit: it simply means one member of a married pair is having sex with someone who is not their married partner. Adulterous relations, therefore, could include ones where one married partner knows about the other's extramarital daliances.


> ...This conversation won't go anywhere until you say why you think
> infidelity is good (or, at least, not destructive) under most sets of
> circumstances.

If you want to restrict the discussion to situations where the partner having extramarital relations is deceiving the other, and further stipulate that deceit is unacceptable, then of course it is--but only on the stipulations you've made. So who's setting the conditions that are stalling the conversation?

As far as deceit in intimate relations being _a priori_ bad, though, I have two words: surprise party. -- Curtiss



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list