BS: Sexual Infidelity

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 12:48 PM

I don't understand the obsession with the sex lives of politicians..who cares who they sleep with ? As long at they do what they are elected to do and are not involved in criminal activity..it is really none of our bleedin business.
   Most countries take the view that people, politicians included, are entitled to a private life...let them have a private life.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 11:25 AM

Sorry I brought it up. How about we get back on track with the original discussion instead of going down that old and tired religion road, again. Or, start a different thread or resurrect (pun intended) one of the old ones if you want to bash about? Thanks!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 09:11 AM

Ron D: "Agnosticism makes perfect sense."

I completely agree.

I certainly believe that agnosticism makes much more logical sense than atheism. Not that I would challenge anothers beliefs, only where their belief became an insistence that they were being fully objective and impartial, and indeed assuming their position was necessarily correct and applicable to all.

Gnosticism (or other spiritual paths with advocate direct empirical experience over Priestly intercession) IMO also makes similar sense, as neither agnosticism nor gnosticism are predicated upon blind faith.

Bit of a tangent of course...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 07:35 AM

"...logical sense".   Don't want to misquote.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 07:33 AM

"Real religious faith means not having to make sense".   Now there's a nice objective statement.

In fact, the same can be said of atheism.

There's no proof either way. (Here we go again.   An amazing number of threads seem to lead down this road).

Agnosticism makes perfect sense.   Neither of the other two choices mentioned do--if sense is your main goal.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 07:25 AM

The great tension is between the rise of the idea that our feelings are all important, that they are the test of things; and the concept of the promise and the vow, which is in one sense public, but in a related sense, is a form of internalized public stance, as it is simultaneously made to at least one other person, and in that sense to the community. The tension is (1) to determine what is or is not the defining characteristic of one's self -- is it all what I want or need, or does it involve public elements; and (2) the implications of the decisions.

The political ramifications are obvious: Republicans accuse Democrats of being purely random "feeling" people with no morals, so if they are in charge, everything will dissolve into chaos; meanwhile Democrats believe that moral judgements without regard for the people involved are heartless ideology or hypocrisy. This is why Republicans were so gleeful about Cliinton; and why Democrats are so gleeful about Republican shenanigans. No one ever accused Bill Clinton of hypocrisy.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Midchuck
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 07:08 AM

Am I right that most of the advocates of guilt here are from the USA? If so, it would (again) probably benefit that country to have a lot less religion in its makeup.

If it helps any, a great many people in the USA agree with you. Unfortunately, in a country that more or less invented the idea of religious freedom, too many seem to feel that they're being denied religious freedom if they aren't allowed to force their religion on others.

Real religious faith means not having to make logical sense.

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 03:00 AM

Who says women are not expected to have a libido? Am I right that most of the advocates of guilt here are from the USA? If so, it would (again) probably benefit that country to have a lot less religion in its makeup.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 12:26 AM

Janie, I agree with you, IF that is a promise which has been made, both parties should keep it. In our case, we are neither church people nor Christian, though we are spiritual.

I find the john q. public comment from NPR as disgusting as you do and I do NOT advocate anyone cheating on their partner UNLESS both parties have an agreement and even that takes a great deal of maturity, confidence, and trust. I don't think there are many who are predisposed in our society to handle it that way.

It is obvious that our society still has different standards for men and women...men are expected to stray a little, women are not supposed to even have a libido. THAT disgusts me....that we still have such suppositions in a supposedly enlightened age.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Jun 09 - 12:14 AM

Well at least the language has been enriched.   If you want to do something and don't want to tell your wife about it, you just say: "Sorry, I'll be hiking the Appalachian Trail".

e.g.   "Sorry honey, I won't be able to clean out the garage this evening--I'll be hiking the
Appalachian Trail."

What? That may not have the desired result?


Well, at least guys can use it with each other:   "Hey Larry, haven't seen you for awhile.   Been doing a lot of hiking the Appalachian Trail?"

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Janie
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 10:40 PM

And sorry for not editing out redundancies in my last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Janie
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 10:13 PM

Crow Sister and Kat, if you don't make a promise of fidelity, then no promise is broken and it sounds like that was not one of the promises on which your committed relationships are based.

We have all made promises in our lives that later we have found we can not keep, for any number of reasons. Sometimes we make a decision that we no longer want to keep the promise.   I make very few promises, coming from a family who takes it's promises very, very seriously. I have certainly broken promises, but in my adult life I do not think I have ever broken a promise without advance notice and a discussion.

While there are certainly many exceptions, in Western culture, most committed relationships include an expressed expectation and promise of sexual fidelity, and monogamy is, generally speaking, the normative value in our culture. "Cheating" is when one breaks the rules.

A definition of infidelity: Infidelity is a violation of the mutually agreed-upon rules or boundaries of an intimate relationship, which constitutes a significant breach of faith or a betrayal of core shared values with which the integrity of the relationship is defined. (from Wikipedia.)

While I agree that how a couple or a family chooses to deal with infidelity within the immediate family unit is no one's business but theirs, I disagree that nothing about it is anyone else's business. Reading between the lines of history, I think Mamie Eisenhower and Eleanor Roosevelt and their spouses came to some sort of agreement and accomodation

We are social creatures, imbedded in larger families, neighborhoods, communities, mutual friends. In the case of marriage, it is not only a contract between two individuals, it is also a contract between the couple and the community. It recognizes the interdependence on which the social fabric depends. That is why witnesses are required. That is the prime reason behind all the public ceremony that usually surrounds the rite of marriage in what we call a Wedding. The role of the community as witness to the marriage is both a pledge to support the couple's commitment, and also to hold the couple accountable to the community for that commitment.

Where there is a strong community, the infidelity has an effect on everyone within the social circle of the couple, and children, if there are any. Few among us have not experienced the rippling effect of some one's infidelity on our relationships with the couple involved, our children, our churches or workplaces, our circle of friends, and also acquaintances and/or our extended families.

Infidelity is the most difficult issue for a couple to truly overcome. In most relationships in our culture, it strikes at the core of trust. Once trust is broken at a core level, it almost never can be fully re-established. I have seen this played out again and again in couple's therapy. There may be forgiveness, but the betrayed party never forgets, and rarely truly puts it behind them.

Reading between the lines of easily accessible history, Mamie Eisenhower and Eleanor Roosevelt and their presidential spouses eventually came to some sort of agreement and decision regarding discrete accomodation. It doesn't sound like the same was true of John and Jackie Kennedy. And it certainly was not true of Bill Clinton.

I am not particularly concerned with Sanford except as the latest example among public figures. How he and his wife choose to deal with it is indeed their private decision. As others have noted, he went about his own liason in a manner that is a flagrant violation and abnegation of his public responsibilities.

I heard an extremely obnoxious but priceless statement from john q. public regarding Sanford on NPR this afternoon. Some "person in the street" said, "If you need to get laid, you need to get laid."

I'm disgusted.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: jeddy
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 10:00 PM

there is a couple who take the dogs down our local park.
i think they are maried but she has a long term girlfreind and he ain't comlaining!

good for them they are able to get what they all need out of it and no one feels threatened.

i get jealous enough of my other halfs past partners without new ones. i couldn't handle, it but as long as everyone agrees, fair enough.   the problem comes when lies are being told, which when it comes out, makes the faithful one feel like not only are they not good enough but that they must be stupid not to have seen it.

where poloticians are concerned they may do as they wish just as long as they do the job well and are not being hipocrites( i so wanted to write hippgriffs instead).

i think those who are cheating or about to, should first think of what it is that they stand to lose, trust is easily lost and so hard to get back.          preach over lol

take care all

jade x x

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,hg
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 09:40 PM

"Naked hiking day?" Now there's a holiday worth taking the day off for!!! But I have to wait another year...boo! arf!arf!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,hg
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 09:35 PM

When one of these weak sisters finally kicks out one of these little cowardly tittybabies, I'll believe "we've really come a long way, baby!" Who wants to be married to a cowardly liar?

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Deckman
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 09:01 PM

I well remember a few years ago when some polygamist was taken to court, found guilty, and then sentenced. At that time I asked: "Why sentence him any more ... he's ALREADY been punished enough!" bad bad bob

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 09:00 PM

Right, bo-zer... Cheatin' and country music go hand in hand...

Tryin' to love two women
is like a ball and chain
One's got yer heart
The other has yer name
It's a long, long road
And it tires you brain...

Thisw poor SC governor... I reckon if he's that eat up then he ougtta just say, "Screw it (not literlly, he's allready doen that), I love this Argentine woman and I am gonna just up and leave the country and hook up with here and become an Argentine laborer" or whatever folks with no skills other than being a US politacan e4nd up doing when they move to Argentina with no skills...

Or he needs to break it off with the Argentine lady and suck it up here in the states... Do the counseling and all the required crapolla that the American society expects for him to be one of "them" again...

I donno... His choice...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: bobad
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 08:31 PM

If it weren't for cheating where would country music be?

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Alice
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 08:27 PM

HIV, AIDS, Syphilis, Herpes, Gonorrhea, Papilloma virus (which can cause cancer), Candida, Chlamydia, Trichomoniasis, Bacterial Vaginosis, ... all of these someone can bring back to their spouse/partner after straying into an affair. You never know who that person slept with and who they slept with, etc. I once heard someone explain STD awareness as realizing that you are having sex with everyone else that the other person has had sex with. (Its almost like a pyramid scheme). You don't know who all those other partners came into contact with.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 08:14 PM

You have a ball with the good one and get chained by the bad one? Very deep.... real deep... chest wader deep. Where is my shovel???? buried?

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 08:04 PM

Well, like I have said in the past, why a sane man would want to carry on with two women is beyond my ability to figurate... Ain't that like unConstitutional??? Like "double jeoprady", 'er somethin' like that???

Okay, let me put the qualifier on that... Young people, like in their 20's ain't grown up 'nuff to understand that... Heck, when I was in my 20s I was stupid and did stupid stuff... So did my wife at the time... Hey, it was the fuckin' 60's, wasn't it???

But I got over it and most folks do...

Nah, I think I'll just play this hand out, thank you...

There was a country song that came out about 20 years ago entitled, "Tryin' to Love Two Women"... It was either Conway of George Jones...

"Tryin' to love two women
is like a ball and chain..."

Yeah...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: kendall
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 07:38 PM

Commiting adultry is similar to any other crime. People do it because they think they can get away with it, or they have no concept of consequences.
I've never met a woman who would be worth losing my marriage and reputation for.
I cant say I'm never tempted, I sure as Hell have been, but as Lord Chesterfield said to his son about sex: "The pleasure is temporary, the cost is damndable and the position ridiculous."

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Joe_F
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 06:35 PM

Now that we have largely gotten away from the notion that people have to make promises in order to get laid, that is all the more reasons to expect that people who do make promises will keep them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,Big Norman Voice
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 06:27 PM

Some folks just can't do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Peace
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 05:52 PM

I think people oughta mind their own business.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 05:43 PM

I wasn't ever drunk or stupid, fwiw. Also, when my first husband was "catting" around, I figured what was good for the goose was good for the gander and had a couple of my own flings. We were young and stupid and our marriage did not last. Now we are very good friends after a 32 year hiatus.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Deckman
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 05:33 PM

Think it through folks! REALLY ... if we didn't have people who broke their marriage vows ... WHERE IN HECK WOULD WE GET ALL THOSE BALLADS WE SING! Bob(deckman)Nelson

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Wesley S
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 04:25 PM

As it's been said before - the men need someone to cheat with. So the women { or men } helping the married person cheat is equally guilty of deception in my eyes. Bottom line - if you want to screw around with someone other than your spouse - get a divorce.

It's really not that difficult to keep your pants zipped up. If you want to that is....

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: 3refs
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 04:14 PM

I got caught a long time ago, with someone who stumbled out of the pages of Playboy! I'd go back to jail for 6 years if I could make it go away! Forgiveness was there, but it will never be forgotten!

I think there's quite a difference between a "one nighter" and something that goes on for years. Being drunk and stupid is a long way from calculating and purposeful!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: gnu
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 03:42 PM

Sexual In Fidelity :

Stop that!

deargnu

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 03:38 PM

There are many potential betrayals in any marriage, whether it's gambling away the house or bank account or maintaining a secret life of burglary and theft, or a Dr. Jekyll type of night life or sexual infidelity which exposes the 'innocent' partner to disease, news of a second family somewhere, revealing to one's own young children the frailty of their parent and having to accept that the person you love does not share your mores.

From what I understand to be the case, women, by and large, more so than men, tend to 'make it personal'- we hear of a case and immediately apply it to how we would feel in similar circumstance.

I do the same. Frankly, I don't care what other people do. I just would not want it in my own life.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,Neil D
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 03:36 PM

From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 01:30 AM

I read the title of this thread as Sexual Hifidelity.


That's when you can clearly hear them coming.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: PoppaGator
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 02:53 PM

By the way ~ did anyone connect the original excuse ("I'm hiking on the Appalachian Trail") with the fact that Naked Hiking Day ~ celebrated nationally, but primarily on that very trail ~ had been scheduled for that very weekend?

My first thought was that maybe the guy doesn't want the public to know he's a nudism enthusiast.

Of course, I was wrong. He was naked, all right, but not out on the trail ~ he was naked between the sheets in Buenos Aires.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Cats
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 02:36 PM

Totally agree PoppaGator. Having the cake, and all the ingredients, and not seeing any reason why that should be at all hurtful... and carrying on the affair under your own roof by tricking your partner ....That is Cheating and Low.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: PoppaGator
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 02:12 PM

The discussion on this morning's Today show centered on the question "Why do MEN cheat?" I'm very happy to see that no one in this forum has fallen into that line of thought. (Not yet, anyway.)

Who the hell are these guys cheating with? In the overwhelming majority of case, with women. Neither gender has a patent on infidelity.

I'd like to point out that there's a significant difference between losing interest in a current partner while being drawn to someone else, on the one hand, and carrying out an affair with no intention of terminating the existing relationship. Trying to have your cake and eat it too, to continue appearing as the good-guy husband and father that people look up to (and will vote for) ~ that's cheating.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Maryrrf
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 02:10 PM

I'm not judging infidelity per se, because ultimately it's for a couple to work out what's right for them. It is tragic when one wants monogamy and the other doesn't, and I'm sure that happens often. Whatever the case, it is a private matter that has no business being hashed out in public. But in the case of Sanford, he has been so sanctimonious and judgemental that it's hard to feel sorry for him. This article contains some of his quotes -

"He voted for the impeachment of Bill Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, questioning his "moral legitimacy", and said of a fellow Republican congressman who cheated on his wife: "The bottom line is that he lied under a different oath - the oath to his wife."s ".


Errr..."people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" comes to mind.

Using official e-mails and thinking he could pull off sneaking away to Argentina while saying he was hiking the Appalachian Trail was pretty weird...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 01:52 PM

I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your views, CS.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 01:45 PM

Sorry, it sounds like I'm some pretending to be some kind of fecking wannabe kool guru or something.

For the record, I used to be an intensely insecure and jealous person, who could not stand for anything other than total monogomy. I questioned my intense feelings, and meditated upon them. It's taken me some years to come to such personal and contentious conclusions about these kinds of matters...

Otherwise, of course, I respect any other persons view.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 01:39 PM

There seem to be two strands of thought getting mixed up here.

FIrst, should people who have promised to be sexually faithful? A promise is a promise - but if they break it, it is nobody's business but theirs and their lover's/family's.

Second, does it matter whether a politician is sexually unfaithful, gay, indulges in muffin the mule, etc (or even steals excessive expenses). The answer is NO! Politicians are in office to get the best outcome for those they represent (and the philosophy on who they represent varies from system to system).

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 01:14 PM

Nice story Katlaughing.

I may have missed Janies point, but essentially I guess I would contend that it is a religiously informed societal indoctrination which results in unrealistic *expectations* of eternal monogomy, that is to blame for so many failed marriages - rather than infidelity per se.

Otherwise, I am more than happy to see preachy politicians get caught out in their hypocricy.

Infidelity isn't a form of dysfunction requiring rectification IMHO, it is a natural behavioural trait amongst human beings, which requires honest aknowledgement and broader societal acceptance. What we need to do is rectify our collective assumptions about what is, and what is not, reasonable and realistic to expect within a long term relationship. A slow haul to be sure considering the amount of preaching that we are all subject to everday.

I would also contend that eliminating the 'taboo' element of extramarital affairs, *could* potentially greatly disempower their draw. But that is nothing more than a presumption based on the notion that people can be especially excited by things that are covert and taboo..

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 12:43 PM

Hmmm - I've always felt that it isn't the Other Woman's job to keep someone else's husband faithful, yet many people blame her (even if She isn't married to anybody and thus has not broken any vows) as much as the straying husband. Can't say I agree with that, personally.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 12:08 PM

Until AIDS come on the scene, my Rog and I had what one would call an open marriage. We were very open and honest about everything and knew if the other was going to be with someone else. He never went with anyone, but I did a few times. It was never random nor with a stranger just met. Neither of us ever felt threatened or at a loss concerning one another, it was just another aspect of our lives. But, with AIDS and losing dear friends, it became too scary and our lives were changing, settling down into more demanding routines of moving cross-country, kids growing up, etc. so that was the end of that. If it were important to either of us, now, I am sure we would be supportive of one another, but there's so much more to our lives than just sex. I think one of the reasons we are almost at our thirtieth anniversary is we always have been secure with one another...there was never any doubt of our staying together even if we were with someone else for a night or two.

As to public figures...they need to keep it to themselves. This going on tv and doing press releases, etc., speaking to their families through the media is despicable. His leaving no one in charge, etc. IS more troubling and needs to be dealt with, as BillD said. The public, live confessional thing goes back to scarlet letters days, I suppose, and it goes hand in hand with other prurient television these days ala the whole nation/world watching as one young couple's marriage and family fall apart every week in a thirty minute episode of Jon & Kate Plus Eight. THAT should be taken off tv asap, imo!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Janie
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 12:04 PM

Crow Sister, I think you missed my point entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,Big Norman Voice
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 12:03 PM

Well there's a lot of pious crap spoken about this subject. Glad to see Crow Sister has at least got some grasp of the realities of life.
People do like to take sides on moral issues, even when it has SFA to do with them.
Some folk on here have been castigated for straying, while the many infidelities of others have gone without comment.
If you don't know the full story, keep your trap shut I say.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: kendall
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 11:47 AM

If you are going to dance, you must pay the piper/fiddler.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: jacqui.c
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 11:46 AM

During my first marriage my husband had affairs when I was pregnant with my second and third child. His second mistress decided she wanted to keep him and that ended the marriage.

My second husband had an affair with an old girlfriend while working away from home. That was the end of that marriage.

18 years into my third marriage I found I had strong feelings for another man. I tried to fight the feelings but, in the end, came to the conclusion that I could no longer stay in that marriage. There was never any chance of a relationship with the other guy, who is still a friend, but I could not stay in a marriage when I had those kind of feelings.

I know, from experience, how devastating it can be to find that the person to whom you have made a commitment is breaking a vow. It takes quite a while to get past that and can leave one feeling diminished and trying to work out where they went wrong and what they could have done to prevent this happening. the answer, of course, in usually nothing.

My own view is that, if a new relationship is so important then the existing relationship should be ended before beginning a new one. If it isn't that important then what the hell are you doing, risking what you have just for the sake of a fling? Just my opinion, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 11:23 AM

I think there is a possible difference between someone having an affair and actually leaving their initial partner? I think the latter would be far and away more taxing for me.

I would accept it if my partner had a sexual relationship outside of our committed one (he knows this, but so far has chosen not to) because I personally believe in his right to do with himself what he will - though I would expect him to be respectful of my physical health.

I also maintain no assumption that he will want to remain with me till our dying days (despite the fact he has always been devoted), people change, they meet other people... If that day ever comes, I will attempt to be as graceful about accepting his choice likewise.

It is hard when others are pulled in other directions - and I have been challenged by dear ones choices in the past, but it's also life and to be expected - or so I believe.

Perhaps I'm a pragmatist who aknowledges the power of human desire in ordinary peoples everyday life, perhaps I am equally idealist who believes in respecting anothers freedom of choice.

I don't quite know what I feel about people other than Nuns and Priests taking vows of such intense and eternal commitment on the basis of youthful passions. I feel it takes exceptional people to do so in full congruence, and with enough introspective awareness and self knowledge, to do so successfully. I think I might perhaps be mature enough now, to do so and I think I might like to marry finally. But even so, I wouldn't presume that a signature on a piece of paper could prevent other events sundering that agreement.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: GUEST,Cats
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 10:43 AM

It does not matter if the person is a national figure or not. I have recently been on the receiving end, Jon has been having an affair for three and a half years and has now left me. I had no idea although, it transpires, others did. It is the selfishness, the deceit, the lies and the manipulation of people and lives that is the most hurtful. It is also what the person left behind, that this has happened to, has to pick up. They may think it was a bit of fun, enjoyed the temptation, the excitement of the unknown, the pleasure, the affection, the selfishness and the waywardness but the person on the receiving end has their life torn to shreds and finds an empty void where once was love and kindness, trust and respect. The actual act might 'just be sex' to some but it is the reality of the broken lives that you have to deal with.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 10:38 AM

Well, there is a school of thought that says the way to demonstrate Alphaness is being impeccable throughout. The other school is the one that teaches being apecker above the neck. After long consideration I am of the opinion that you should not make promises, bonds of trust, that you cannot keep, and should not break those you have made. A conclusion drawn from a survey of experiences, not just a theoretical moral standard.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual Infidelity
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jun 09 - 10:35 AM

Janie has it right: "·.be up front with your partner before you act so your partner can decide if they want to risk staying in the relationship with you under those conditions.

Don't break the contract and try to conceal that you have done so."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(But of course, the wisdom is "It's easier to get forgiveness than permission.")

Sanford deceived not only his wife, but his staff and the state...and showed appalling carelessness in doing so. That newspaper had email evidence since Dec.! He used his official email to correspond...with full addresses. He would never have survived the investigations that go with an attempt for HIGHER office.
Other politicians have survived the embarrassing publicity over their 'moral' slips, but this goes to basic competence and judgement.

He is toast.