Married Women, Single Women

[reset]

yeah I think it's interesting to see how each guy here responds. It's not an easy question otherwise we wouldn't be at page 13.

Well it was easy for MacAvoy.

 

[STR8UP]

I just realized something.

this is a good discussion with lots of great points being debated, but I just came to the realization that at this point I could write a Rollo T, Anti-Dump, Pook style MASTERPIECE post, and it would turn into "let's prove STR8UP wrong" thread on the first page.

It's sad that I could have a very bad year, express some disappointment in life, and end up barely even being able to post here anymore, no matter what the topic.

But I love you guys anyway

 

[ketostix]

I just realized something.

this is a good discussion with lots of great points being debated, but I just came to the realization that at this point I could write a Rollo T, Anti-Dump, Pook style MASTERPIECE post, and it would turn into "let's prove STR8UP wrong" thread on the first page.

It's sad that I could have a very bad year, express some disappointment in life, and end up barely even being able to post here anymore, no matter what the topic.

But I love you guys anyway

You could say the sky is blue at this point and they'd come back with "What about clouds?", "what about the sky on Mars, which sky?".

 

[Luthor Rex]

Is adultery frowned upon by society? Yes. Why? Well the church has a BIG part in that.

In the animal world is cheating wrong? Animals are driven by the instincts to eat and fukk. this might mean defending territory and access to mates, but there is no "right" or "wrong".

And the root of our morals, unconscious root that is, is our Darwinian past. If you want to compare to nature: some animals, when they take over the 'possession' of females, will kill the cubs the female had so she'll want to have the babies of the new male. From human beings to lions and tigers, the mating instinct and the murder instinct are tightly bound. Love and hate will always be entwined. So there is really no suprise about people being pissed off over cheating

Men have wanted virgins to ensure paternity. The men who didn't care about it made fewer babies. We want hot mates and plentiful food but the matrix has given us porn and MacDonalds instead.

Morals / ethics exist in nature the way numbers exist in nature: they are both just representations we use to recognize what is already going on. Human beings didn't pull morals out of their butts, they are an evolved responce to the mating environment. Why do you think there has been such a resurgence of religion in the 21st century? Ignorance may be part of it, but the bare facts are religious people make more babies.

The brutal irony of the 21st century is that those who are showing the most Darwinian fitness are those who are least likely to believe in Darwin.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

However, if results are not actualized, the behavior will never be learned because CHANGE will not occur.

So the above statement is an incorrect ABSOLUTE.

Sorry to split hairs, but "learned", being past tense, has to imply an actualization of the behavior one is learning - ergo not an incorrect absolute.

If hard work and fortitude did not get him there, he would not be considered disciplined in anyone's standards.

Now we're getting somewhere. Why should "hard work and fortitude" be considered characteristics of "discipline"?

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

I'd bang my best friends' g/f to do him a favour & expose her for the cheating hor she is.

And you'd hate every minute of it,...

 

[cordoncordon]

Well put, the woman MADE HER MOVE & it's ALL ON HER

So if your buddy says he has a plan to rob a bank and you go along with it, its all on him because your buddy is the one who made the initial move?

Do you have any moral fiber in you whatsoever? A backbone? Anything? Buehler?

 

[Luthor Rex]

I just realized something.

this is a good discussion with lots of great points being debated, but I just came to the realization that at this point I could write a Rollo T, Anti-Dump, Pook style MASTERPIECE post, and it would turn into "let's prove STR8UP wrong" thread on the first page.

No Str8up you're wrong! Everyone would love your post!

 

[guru1000]

Now we're getting somewhere. Why should "hard work and fortitude" be considered characteristics of "discipline"?

Some may define "character" as moral strength, self-discipline and fortitude.

For a guy like STR*UP, this requires HARD WORK.

 

[iqqi]

This thread sucks.

And Latinoman, to answer your question, I am always shocked at Keto's lack of reading comprehension. Besides that he is kind of smart.

STR8UP has way too big of a head for someone so lost. Lol. Now he thinks he is Pook.

 

[Latinoman]

That's why it was an analogy . You made it perfectly clear earlier that having sex with a married woman is an ethics violations just as violating any criminal law is an ethics violation of more magnitude (although apparently you don't believe in the concept of magnitude and ethics). I think you are arguing in circles at this point.

Analogy? Since when a criminal act is the same as an unethical act???

Let me be EXTREMELY simplistic by providing the difference between the two with an example:

1- Lawyer steals money from his client = Criminal act
2- Lawyer violates client priviledge information = Unethical act

Number 1 will get you in jail. Number 2 will cost you your license/job

All I need is a dictionary to do that. To be honest most sociology professors are zealots and don't know anything about morals, ethics and fair play.

Are you sure you are over 25? I am starting to believe you are a High School kid. I am serious too.

You don't have to but when people question someone's ethics/morals like they did here ,then If you have a justification you should show it. And if you don't even have a solid justification then you probably don't have any morals.

Okay...questioning somebody's morals is the same as questioning somebody tastes for a particular flavor of ice cream. It is a VERY personal thing. No one can question somebody else morals or shove their morals. However, people can talk about what is ethical and unethical or right and wrong based on our SOCIETAL standards. Do you want me to provide a very simplistic example? Because I believe I have said this about 8 or 9 times in this thread and you STILL don't understand.

Yes you can. You can also demonstrate how an ethics rule or law is unethical its self.

And I'm sure that if my aunt had a c_uck...she would be my uncle.

But it's society's position that it's unethical to sleep with two women at the same time. Are you going to stop doing that too or just pick and choose which ethics you choose to follow?

When it comes to societal ethics...I will always go by what MY morals dictate me as long as I am not breaking the law or breaking my profession code of ethics. You see? I am a law abiding citizen. I follow my professions code of ethics. But my Morals will always trump Societal standards (ethics).

The difference is that I don't justify my morals.

This is just silly. In Nazi Germany it was ethical to kill Jews. Sometimes "ethical" behavior is actually unethical. But you would never question it right?

You see why you need to educate yourself? Listen...do not confuse genocide or crimes against human kind with "ethical" behavior.

This is just wrong. What is moral and immoral is independent of what any one person chooses to believe is moral and immoral.

Hmmmmm...didn't I just say that?

Besides, ethics are presupposed on what's moral and immoral. So preaching ethics IS preaching morals.

For Christ sake. Another idiotic statement. Come on dude...you can do better than that.

Unethical, immoral or not it makes no difference.

Ethical or Moral...there is a HUGE difference. Read ALL my posts...and learn something.

 

[Latinoman]

Originally Posted by Latinoman
Because you are talking about CRIMINAL acts that are punishable by the law.

That's why it was an analogy . You made it perfectly clear earlier that having sex with a married woman is an ethics violations just as violating any criminal law is an ethics violation of more magnitude (although apparently you don't believe in the concept of magnitude and ethics). I think you are arguing in circles at this point.

What I made clear is that having sex with a married woman is unethical and is wrong under our societal standards....but it is NOT illegal.

Arguing in circles? It is obvious that I know what I am talking about and you don't. This debate is similar to the debate we had in this thread http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142674&page=3
that eventually forced me to write post #47.

You are very argumentative to the point that you are arguing for the heck of arguing.

 

[Latinoman]

I can probably comprehend the English language much better than you.

Do not believe just because you have a better grammar or because English is my second language that you have better comprehension of the English language. In fact, judging by this thread...you don't.

You bring up that battery thing but you didn't know what you were talking about and kept repeating the same simple point over and ovver.

I had formal training when I was in the military on battery. Make no mistake about that. And I had to repeat the same things over and over, because you had PROBLEMS understanding my point.

The problem is you are just not making much fvcking sense.

Of course I am not going to make sense. You are like the person tied up in chains inside a cave...which "reallity" are simply shadows. In your eyes a fruit basket looks the way a SHADOW of a fruit basket looks like. Now, after years inside that cave...if I take you outside you can actually get blinded by the sun. That's why I should be taking it slow with you...as not to confuse you or blind you with the sunshine of wisdom. Read Plato...he came with the above parabole.

We all are aware of what most of society believes is ethical/unethical behavior, but since when did we on here allow society's ethics to control what we believe and do?

EXACTLY. And that is the ENTIRE point of my posts. He should NOT justify his behavior or imply what he did was right. It is his life.

Just because something is considerd ethical/unethical doesn't automatically mean the reasoning for that is sound

I TOTALLY agree with you.

and that it is sound to follow someone else's ethics.

Hmmmm...it is not somebody else...it is societal collective norm of ethics.

 

[iqqi]

This thread is really just all Keto, saying dumb sh!t.

Latinoman, for the love of sosuave, disengage... DISENGAGE!!!!

 

[Latinoman]

I just realized something.

this is a good discussion with lots of great points being debated, but I just came to the realization that at this point I could write a Rollo T, Anti-Dump, Pook style MASTERPIECE post, and it would turn into "let's prove STR8UP wrong" thread on the first page.

It's sad that I could have a very bad year, express some disappointment in life, and end up barely even being able to post here anymore, no matter what the topic.

But I love you guys anyway

This is actually a GREAT thread as ethics vs. morals vs. values are always something interesting debating.

As I said...I gave you props in the very first post. In fact, my very first post in this thread was stating how good this thread was and making clear that I was not going to comment on the sex with married woman (as I personally consider that a matter of personal morals and values).

My issue was when you were justifying the behavior as implying you did nothing unethical. You and I know that what you did was wrong and in our society is viewed as unethical (also called "immoral" for lack of better term). If you would have accepted that fact...I would have actually jumped on the OTHER people that were attacking you. Because you know what? As long as you can look yourself in the mirror and as long as you are not committing any criminal acts or violating any professional codes of ethics...then who cares about what society consider "immoral" or ethical?

 

[Latinoman]

This thread is really just all Keto, saying dumb sh!t.

Latinoman, for the love of sosuave, disengage... DISENGAGE!!!!

I actually like Keto and he is actually one of my favorite posters.

The only issue I have is that he is argumentative and do not provide anything concrete to back up his debate. That's the only problem I have.

 

[ketostix]

Analogy? Since when a criminal act is the same as an unethical act???

Let me be EXTREMELY simplistic by providing the difference between the two with an example:

1- Lawyer steals money from his client = Criminal act
2- Lawyer violates client priviledge information = Unethical act

Number 1 will get you in jail. Number 2 will cost you your license/job

Dude they are both consider to be unethical by law. It's the matter of what degree the law sees an act as being unethical which, depends on the circumstances and not just the act. If it is highly unethical and clearcut it's criminalized. You could make another example: Speeding is considered unethical (presumably because it increases rsiks to other drivers) and depending on the speed it's usually just a noncriminal citation. Hitting someone's car and driving off is more unethic and is, at least in my state, a criminal violation one degree below a felony. What are you trying to prove here other than what I've been saying all along?

Are you sure you are over 25? I am starting to believe you are a High School kid. I am serious too

.

I'm starting to believe you might be a 40 year old with a GED if you want to take things down that route.

Okay...questioning somebody's morals is the same as questioning somebody tastes for a particular flavor of ice cream. It is a VERY personal thing. No one can question somebody else morals or shove their morals. However, people can talk about what is ethical and unethical or right and wrong based on our SOCIETAL standards. Do you want me to provide a very simplistic example? Because I believe I have said this about 8 or 9 times in this thread and you STILL don't understand.

You made your point about what society finds ethical/unethical about 10 times now and I've responded to it. It's like with that battery situation. You just keep making a simplistic argument over and over. Where do you think ethics and societal beliefs come from? From a general consensus of what is moral. What is reasonable and what is moral is separate and independent from what any one individual chooses to accept as moral.

And I'm sure that if my aunt had a c_uck...she would be my uncle.

This is an example of you not being able to grasp simple concepts.

When it comes to societal ethics...I will always go by what MY morals dictate me as long as I am not breaking the law or breaking my profession code of ethics. You see? I am a law abiding citizen. I follow my professions code of ethics. But my Morals will always trump Societal standards (ethics).

And this is what I, Str8up and others are doing too. I guess your morals just convienantly happen to match society's ethics .

The difference is that I don't justify my morals.

So what? Is it because you can't? What differences does it make. Why do you keep mentioning morals and ethics? You've just said a person's own morals should trump ethics.

You see why you need to educate yourself? Listen...do not confuse genocide or crimes against human kind with "ethical" behavior.

You've confused it not me. You made it totally clear that whatever society currently finds to be ethical can't be questioned.

Hmmmmm...didn't I just say that?

No, dude you said morals are totally dependent on each person's beliefs. Do you not even know what you are writing? LOL

For Christ sake. Another idiotic statement. Come on dude...you can do better than that.

OK genuis, you said ethics is dependent on society's predominate belief. Then what do you think the first cause of those beliefs were based? Moral reasoning maybe?

Ethical or Moral...there is a HUGE difference. Read ALL my posts...and learn something.

There is not a huge difference. If that's the case then ethics are meaningless if they're not based on well reasoned morals. They are totally related. The only thing I'm learning here is you have a very narrow way of thinking about things.

 

[ketostix]

I actually like Keto and he is actually one of my favorite posters.

The only issue I have is that he is argumentative and do not provide anything concrete to back up his debate. That's the only problem I have.

LOL OK. What can I tell you, you are argumentative too and it's only your own perception being the reason you can't see anything concrete in my posts.

 

[iqqi]

This thread will go on and on then.

I tried.

 

[MacAvoy]

As I said...I gave you props in the very first post. In fact, my very first post in this thread was stating how good this thread was and making clear that I was not going to comment on the sex with married woman (as I personally consider that a matter of personal morals and values).

My issue was when you were justifying the behavior as implying you did nothing unethical.

Maybe you should repeat that a few more times becuase I don't think anyone heard you say it the first 8 times.