Married MAN HELP!!!

1. 48

   Kat.foreverposted 14 years ago

   Is it morally wrong to have a temporary friends with benefits type of situation with a married man?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      woolman60posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      “If you marry a man who cheats on his wife, you'll be married to a man who cheats on his wife.”

      replyreport
      1. 0

         woolman60posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What – therefore – God has joined together – let no man put asunder.

         replyreport
   2. 85

      Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      It's morally wrong unless the wife has been consulted and she is happy with the arrangement.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You mean it's morally wrong for a wife to be happy with such an arrangement?

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Oops that came out all wrong didn't it?  What I meant to say was, it's OK for a man to have temporary partners if his wife knows and agrees to it (and vice versa).  Not my cup of tea but I know it works for some.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Sure I understood Marisa, I was just teasing you

               replyreport
2. 67

   Mishaposted 14 years ago

   In most morals - yes, it is wrong to fuck a married man. Can't say for all morals though

   replyreport
   1. 60

      katiem2posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      If you have to ask you have doubt and therefore you've answered your own question.  Looking for an out, I'm sure you can think of something.
      
      No one ever does anything wrong without first rationalizing in their OWN mind that it's right. 
      
      Good Luck With That

      replyreport
      1. 60

         katiem2posted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Rock ON Misha your a prince

         replyreport
         1. 67

            Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I am too old for one - but aww, thanks

            replyreport
   2. 48

      Kat.foreverposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Can you explain why it is morally wrong?
      If the wife never knows, then it does no harm to her.
      If it is enabling the man to stay in his marriage, then technically it is doing no harm to the marriage either.
      No harm is being done, so why is it morally wrong?
      Technically, a marriage is a legally binding contract. But the otherwoman has not agreed to this contract. So she has no legal obligation to stay away from the married man.
      On what basis, is the temporary and casual relationship between the otherwoman and the married man morally wrong?

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Nah, I can't explain cause I am immoral. Or is it moralless? Those who have morals, will gladly do in a minute.
         
         Oh, and don't mix moral with law - they are altogether different animals.

         replyreport
      2. 83

         wychicposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Whether she actually ever knows about it or not, it DOES harm her because her husband is giving the love and affection that he promised to her, to someone else. Even if she goes her entire life without ever knowing why her husband has grown more cold and distant, it will do harm to her...and to him too, because he no doubt will have some sort of internal conflict. That said, if he has to have an affair to stay married, what kind of marriage is that? Sounds like it'd be doing her a huge favor to get a divorce...I know I would have been grateful if my ex had simply done that instead of taken the way that was easiest for him.

         replyreport
      3. 92

         Rochelle Frankposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You cannot be sure that the wife will never know-- the truth comes out in various ways.
         A marriage involves two people. He is not 'staying in his marriage' if it involves another person.
         
         Harm is being done if he is living a lie. He has broken his promise to her.
         
         He has broken his contract. The other woman is a party to the crime, legally.
         
         If you can't understand it--you don't understand the basis.

         replyreport
      4. 60

         IvyCrenshawposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         A woman who is at all in-tune with her husband will know.  She may not know exactly what is going on, but she will be aware that something is wrong.

         replyreport
      5. 85

         Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         So you're saying, if you steal something from me and I don't notice, then it's not morally wrong?
         
         
         
         That makes sense, if that's why the man is engaging in casual sex.  But it's quite likely he wouldn't leave his marriage, even if he couldn't get casual sex. And there's always the risk his wife will find out - which could destroy the marriage.  So the other woman is taking a big risk, which won't hurt her but could seriously hurt another woman (the wife). Not very sisterly.
         
         
         
         Let's say one of your friends wanted to steal something.  If you enable them to achieve their criminal act, you're saying that wouldn't be morally wrong?

         replyreport
3. 71

   Cagsilposted 14 years ago

   Yes, friends with benefits means friendship with sexual oriented additions without feelings.
   
   It would not be morally right, on both. You or the other person.
   
   A married man is suppose to be committed to his spouse, which means he keeps his hands off another.
   
   You getting mixed up with him, shows you do not understand morals. Which is a little ironic, to say the least.
   
   Then again, your post alone shows a serious lack of knowledge of life. But, it could just be me.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      katiem2posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Aw Cagsil what a lovely thing to say

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Glad you like it Katie. Apparently, this person needs to look up the word "Integrity", because it's missing in their actions.

         replyreport
         1. 48

            Kat.foreverposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            It's interesting that you put integrity and morality into the same basket. Many great and respected people, with the greatest of integrity, and the greatest sense of morality, have yet done immoral things.

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               And, it shows their ignorance.

               replyreport
               1. 48

                  Kat.foreverposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I think it actually shows the human condition.
                  To know something is wrong, but to do it anyway.
                  And I think that anyone who cannot understand this, has not faced true temptation. Most people who are able to walk away from temptation do so because ultimately it benefits them more to walk away than to give in. Whether this is due to their religious morals, guilt, fear of punishment, or whatever. Whatever the reason - their reason to walk away outweighs their reason to give in to temptation.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     woolman60posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     “Middle age is having a choice between two temptations and choosing the one that’ll get you home earlier.”

                     replyreport
                  2. 71

                     Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     It shows ignorance, because these people you are talking about did immoral actions, to suit themselves. Thus, selfish.
                     
                     It also shows that they really do not have Integrity, as you claim.
                     Is ignorance. It shows also a person's inability to control themselves.
                     Well, I can speak from experience and the temptation is irrelevant. If you cannot or willfully decide to not control yourself, then you are accountable for ALL consequences that happen from that action.
                     What is your point with this statement. They walk away because they know it's wrong.
                     It boils down to CHOICE and understanding what in life is right or wrong.

                     replyreport
                  3. 89

                     wildernessposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     It's called integrity, as noted above.  Most people vow to maintain fidelity to their spouse during the wedding ceremony.
                     
                     While I could understand a one night stand, (as you point out, temptation can be strong) an ongoing relationship outside one's marriage is inexcusable, even in a bad marriage.  If you want out, get out.  If not, stay in and keep to your agreement.

                     replyreport
                     1. 48

                        Kat.foreverposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        This is clearly not the place for a philosophical discussion.

                        replyreport
                        1. 71

                           Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           And, clearly you are nowhere near being philosophical about your responses.
                           
                           So, please do not try to be either. Your OP already puts you in a position of defending your actions. There can be no offensive position to engage in a philosophical discussion.
                           
                           Your actions with a married man, would say you would be heavily at a disadvantage.

                           replyreport
                           1. 48

                              Kat.foreverposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              Well, actually it was just a hypothetical question.
                              But thanks for jumping to conclusions!

                              replyreport
                              1. 71

                                 Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 Conclusions? No! Just reading your words.

                                 replyreport
                        2. 92

                           Rochelle Frankposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Clearly you want to see a definition of morality with no philosophy. What is your definition of morality?

                           replyreport
                        3. 0

                           woolman60posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Kat
                           Plain and simple once a cheater always a cheater
                           Don’t judge me because of your actions or our comments and are you upset with us because you want us to condone  what you have done or what you want to do and I won't defend you for doing it, sorry no can do

                           replyreport
4. 61

   SomewayOuttaHereposted 14 years ago

   

   replyreport
5. 60

   tah658posted 14 years ago

   its wrong but its also wrong to go through this short life unhappy. so its complicated.

   replyreport
6. 69

   torimariposted 14 years ago

   Hypothetical question all of the sudden? With all the defensive retorts, and attempts to rationalize the morality of cheating from the OP, it's funny she only points it out 10 replies after the original post.
   
   If you didn't want people 'jumping to conclusions' perhaps you should have been more concise originally. Not to mention your title is anything, but hypothetical.  "Married MAN HELP!" Sorry, it just screams: I got myself in quite the pickle with a married man, thus needing to ease the guilt through looking for justification from others? :]

   replyreport