Posted on 12/29/2014 8:22:43 AM PST by C19fan
This may seem to be a rather obscure topic, but it popped up while I was reading Helen Smith’s musings on whether or not pornography should be made illegal and the long term, detrimental effects that it can have on marriage. As a subset of that discussion, she touched on David Friedman’s book, Law’s Order: What Economics Has to Do with Law and Why It Matters. In it, Friedman makes the following observation on prostitution in general and the specific side effects it can have when married men pay for sex outside of marriage. (I specify “men” here only because incidents of women engaging prostitutes are so rare as to be a statistical anomaly. In theory this would apply to either gender.)
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Not counting crimes against person and property, which is a false argument, when the government legislates morality (drugs, prostitution etc..) it is always a failure.
“Faithfulness is fundamental to the marriage contract. Those who don’t want to be held to such a standard shouldn’t enter such a contract. Or, as the law allows, should exit such a contract.
Pretty basic and pretty straightforward.”
Faithfulness isn’t something you can regulate.
You can write your marriage vows that say you promise to be nice to your spouse on her birthday and nothing else and if it’s done by someone vested to perform marriages it’s legal.
Now what exactly is the definition of nice?
While adultery is grounds for divorce, a woman who commits adultery and is sued for divorce still retains her right to her share of any assets.
There’s a marriage vow and there’s a marriage contract. They overlap in some places but they’re not the same thing.
As for adultery being a punishable offense. There’s divorce courts for that.
No other laws are needed.
No guilty conscience on me. You need to prove how a law against adultery is the same as a law against crimes of assault and theft. And that they are ALL "legislating morality". Go ahead.
Good point re: the divorce court.
I don’t need to prove anything. The “can’t legislate morality” crowd needs to prove its point. It can’t. Adultery is as much a violation of rights as rape and robbery. Attempts to defend it, or distinguish it from other offenses are evidence of a diseased mind.
” Adultery is as much a violation of rights as rape and robbery”
No
I'm pretty sure I did. Legislating against assault and theft do not have a damn thing to do, in a legal sense, with "morality" . Whose rights does adultery violate?
Attempts to defend it, or distinguish it from other offenses are evidence of a diseased mind.
That is not an argument. It is an opinion, and a lame one.
I don’t disagree with you.
Please reread my response to you. You asked a question (how to adjudicate) - I simply answered it (the same way we currently adjudicate contract law: if the contract is not honored, the offending party “loses”).
By definition, adultery means the faithful spouse doesn't approve and doesn't even know what the other spouse is doing, at least not until he or she finds out. By then, his or her health has already been put at risk. So, one spouse is secretly engaging in risky behavior while putting the other spouse's health in danger.
The STD argument is not much different than saying I can sue my wife for reckless endangerment because she buys processed food or because she smokes in the house, second hand smoke you know.
That was a stretch of logic right there, my FRiend. Of course you know if your wife buys processed food and smokes in the house. Those two behaviors are not the equivalent of adultery.
“By definition, adultery means the faithful spouse doesn’t approve and doesn’t even know what the other spouse is doing, at least not until he or she finds out. By then, his or her health has already been put at risk. So, one spouse is secretly engaging in risky behavior while putting the other spouse’s health in danger.”
When the faithful spouse finds out, seek a remedy.
Passing nanny state morality laws based on things that may happen doesn’t promote personal liberty.
“That was a stretch of logic right there, my FRiend. Of course you know if your wife buys processed food and smokes in the house. Those two behaviors are not the equivalent of adultery.”
It’s no more of a stretch than trying to make a reckless endangerment argument. That’s holding up the exception and trying to say it’s the rule.
The real reason and purpose of any kind of anti-adultery law is to try to prohibit behaviors that you personally disagree with. Usually on religious or moral grounds.
If adultery offends you. Don’t practice it.
If your spouse practices it well then you choose wrong for your set of personal beliefs. That’s not mine nor the governments responsibility to make bad decisions illegal.
I think you know what I mean, which is how would you feed the process... also God would need to show up as plaintiff...
No, no, reckless endangerment means that the person engaged in activity that could have resulted in physical harm (or death) to another person. For example, driving while intoxicated.
When the faithful spouse finds out, seek a remedy.
You keep missing the point that, currently, there is no legal remedy.
Why is it the only legal contract that can be ended at whim by a single party will little penalty (or even a benefit) be marriage?
It is a contract. Breaking a contract should have consequences.
Sorry but if the choice is lid down and cat shares with me, or lid up and I always have to wonder...OCD wins, lid is down.
That statement could not possibly be more false. I'm literally laughing out loud that anybody could make it and expect to be taken seriously.
MEOW
“No, no, reckless endangerment means that the person engaged in activity that could have resulted in physical harm (or death) to another person. For example, driving while intoxicated.”
Or driving with the radio too loud lol.
“You keep missing the point that, currently, there is no legal remedy.”
A divorce lawyer will have a remedy.
No, a divorce lawyer cannot offer a remedy. No legal remedy exists - at least not in most states.
I just did a search and found out that some states do consider adultery a crime, and one state will not award a cheating spouse alimony.
But most of the other states have taken everything in the opposite direction with no penalty at all. Shoot, some states practically reward a spouse for cheating. The cheating spouse could have been hooking up with multiple strangers, and the court will consider that to be his or her “preference.” I know of faithful spouses who had to fork over their homes, half of their savings, and even alimony and child support payments to their cheating spouses after a divorce.
So, no, divorce lawyers cannot offer a remedy, unless the divorce is in a state with laws that penalize adultery.
“No, a divorce lawyer cannot offer a remedy. No legal remedy exists - at least not in most states.”
A divorce lawyer can get you divorced. There’s your remedy for an adulterous spouse but suspect you already knew I meant that.
In any case you seem to be another big government conservative nanny stater.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.