Wow. And Melrose Place
has been off the air for years.
Can't blame Amanda . . .
Posted on 09/27/2005 6:28:45 AM PDT by ElCapusto
You would prefer that we merely continue to subsidize adulterous behavior?
I agree.
Already posted almost a week ago with nearly 400 replies.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1489659/posts
Yes, it used to be that a man who was unfaithful to his wife in this country and left her and his children to be with some young floozy would be socially ostracized. His friends would abandon him, business associates would not trust him, no one would talk to him. Now he and the young slut will be invited to every dinner party and no one will say a censuring word because they don't want to be considered "judgmental." It used to be that a woman who was caught committing adultery would nine times out of ten lose her children to him. She was regarded as little more than a common whore. Now, once again, no one says anything to her because that would be judgmental. When there's no social stigma attached to an action people tend to engage in it more frequently. Let's note the example of aggressive homosexual proselytizing as well.
Nobody's saying (at least, I hope nobody's saying) that adultery should be prosecuted as a crime, the way it once was. But as a people we ought to stop worrying about hurting the adulterers' feelings by speaking out. It's possible that when the children who have been robbed of their homes by adultery grow up they won't be afraid to express their anger more openly, and adultery will become as reviled as it was in the old days.
We can always dream!
I'd argue that the internet today has the same level of effect on peoples' perversions as TV did for breaking down traditional discipline.
That is an astute observation.
First of all,forget about "worldwide".Let's talk USA here.
Yes,adultery has been around since Day One,but the Baby Boomers,so many of whom are guided by the basic premise of "if it feels good,do it",have taken it to a whole 'nother level.
Just look at Hollywood.Fifty years ago,the Hollywood types tried to hide their behavior.Today,they're happy to play along with People Magazine pieces entitled "guess the identity of my baby's father".
Would not that contradict his own lifestyle?
I'm inclined to agree.However,I firmly believe that it should,in every state,be considered to be a serious matter in divorce courts...so serious that the adulterer would lose at least some,if not all,of his/her "marital assets" because of that transgression.
Depends on how recently you're referring to....
Historically, a man was almost expected to have a mistress, to 'tup' the house maids, to visit brothels etc. Higher class couples had lovers on the side, with the attitude that descretion was the key. Love and fidelity to second place to status and heirs. Every era, you read of a man's legitimate children and then there would be a listing of his bastards. (I think Robert the Bruce had 13!)
Even in this century, it was more of a 'nudge nudge wink wink' situation if it came out that a man had a girlfriend in the city (where he worked) and a wife in the suburbs. There were lots of 'romantic' comedies based on this premise....the one that pops into my head is "The Guide For the Married Man".
Which dovetails right into the playboys, the players, playas etc that is common now. The attitude being a man can't just be happy with 'one woman' in his life. (This isn't meant to be gender biased, because I know women do the same).
I agree, that in most communities, affairs that came to light were viewed negatively. That infidelity is THE biggest trust killer in a relationship. But it does seem to be very prevalent.
"There is a direct correlation between the steady decline of morals and values in America and this more accepting contemporary attitude toward adultery. Part of the reason is because most people have forgotten what a marriage really is."
I don't think "forgotten" is the right term. Marriage has been denigrated and dismissed for the last 40yrs in the media, and in schools to the point where kids have no clue as to what is required by the marriage "vows". Parents can try to tell them but they are actively undercut by those same schools that look upon religious training as an obstacle to be overcome in their brainwashing...er education.
"True marriage is a solemn covenant relationship between a man, a woman and God. It is a hallowed institution that should be revered, cherished, and preserved.
It violates at least two of the Ten Commandments: the clear prohibitions against committing adultery and coveting your neighbor’s spouse."
You can't use religious based arguments! [gay-asp!] How do you expect to be taken seriously?[/sarc]
While it is true that history is full of examples of wealthy and titled men who openly covorted with mistresses in Olde Europe, such was not the case for the overwhelming majority of the populace. For the middle class and poor (who made up about 90% of the population) adultery was a grievous matter.
Indeed, it has always been so in the United States. Until now, of course.
10,000.00 for marriage licence, 2.00 for divorce decree, that should fix problem...
Oh, I agree! I would have made out like a bandit in court if that were the law in my state.
I wouldn't trust stats from Playboy and some sex therapist touting a book called the Monogamy Myth.
Must've been before Reagan did it to his wife and kids. Since then it's been socially acceptable in our country. Notice Newt and Rudy? Hell, when you think about it Clinton's been one of the few that stayed after the affair.
Wow. And Melrose Place
has been off the air for years.
Can't blame Amanda . . .
Whoa Nelly! Now there's a shocker!
But so what? Murder kills people too. It’s not like I murdered anyone. And I’m basically a good person. I don’t steal anything. That clerk gave me back too much change but I deserved it because that store is overpriced anyway. I may see the car in the driveway next door but I don’t steal it. But I gotta say, I wouldn’t mind having it – I deserve to "treat myself right". I mean, I have an OK car – gets me where I want to go and all but it has these rust spots and dings. It NEEDS to be replaced, alright? And as for lying? Hey, why not “bend” the truth to ensure I get what I want; if a president can do it why not me? Which brings me to that babe at work – hey, what the wife doesn’t know won’t hurt her. And as for authority, particularly parents, well, they were just in the way with their lame ideas and restrictions – clueless, basically. I have my life to live and it’s not my problem if my parents, or my teachers, or my boss can’t get in line with my way of thinking. I have to take care of #1. Hey, I do ok. I’m no worse than anyone else, anyway.
Now let us be realistic. The problem is not that we ignore the last six, it is that we ignore the first four. Perhaps we haven't noticed; the attack is directed at the first four, and for good reason; if the first four are ignored the last six are irrelevant.
Have a nice day.
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.