hey EZ?

at no time did i mean to jump on anyone for their religious beliefs. if i came across that way?

i apologize.

what i was responding to was the implication that if someone doesnt do what WE believe?

regardless of what they believe?

to say they are wrong is a judgement.

to preface it with "according to the doctrines of MY church, temple, whatever what she would have to do in order to be forgiven and to have shown true repentance and to regained the favor of my God, higher power, karma, etc is........"

that is a statement and may be fact, if the writer is correct.

that is what i was trying to get scross.

and EZ?
i like you and i respect you.
i would like to know if you can see the other side tho?

what if this woman is a christian but a baby one?
what if she had a horrific abusive childhood which cause her to equate sex with shame and power?

i have no idea if theses things are true.

but what if they were?

changes things a bit, doesnt it?

Absolutely no hard feelings here mrs dorson

Ones that know me around here know I like it when things get up a bit

Back to the original question...I feel the woman should tell her husband because I really feel he has a right to know...it is such a betrayal to a marriage....one that can't be overcome?...absolutely not...

Again my "bible" talk only came into play when a poster said repentance was between her and her maker...and I said I believe, as my church does, that true repentance is that and where possible one confronts the one they sinned against...

that was it...

in no way did I even think of condemnation for the woman....all of my thoughts were based on how I think I would feel and what I saw between my mom and dad growing up.

I never judged this woman...

and I don't think most here have...

if all of us here answered here that "not telling" was what we thought would that make all of us non-judgemental?

As far as the woman being christian or not doesn't make a difference to me in what she should do. I was just wondering why all of those posts from you when it seemed to offend you in some way that I posted them. And to answer all of the "what if" questions wouldn't really matter if they were not true...so...as one poster said...and I also wondered before she posted it...

""You writing a book girl?"

Does it really? Does it change what the RIGHT thing to do is? Is there really no right and wrong? Is everything just a subjective "judgement?"

Am I being judgemental if I say "child sexual abuse is wrong," or do I need to say "In accordance with my religious and moral beliefs, I am of the opinion that chid sexual abuse is wrong?"

I would argue that if I say the latter - I can't "believe" it too strongly. If I have doubts about the validity of my moral convictions - they're not convictions. They're not even a very strong belief. They're at best a guess or worse, completely random.

And I know it's harsh to compare infidelity to child abuse - but it could just as easily be the cookie from the cookie jar, or a little "white" lie. If you "think it's wrong," it's not a moral conviction - it's only a conviction if you KNOW it's wrong.

Also, if we're going to play "what if" (what if... she had a horrific abusive childhood) then why not play it out...

What if... her husband had a traumatic childhood because his mother's or father's infidelity?

What if... her husband is abusive and if she tells, he might harm/kill her?

You can't discuss what a person "should" do in a situation like this without knowing the specifics (which is why the woman's counselor and clergy should be advising her, not a coworker or strangers on a weight loss board.)

That being said, in this arena (talking about a situation in the abstract) it's perfectly appropriate to discuss not only opinions, but moral beliefs and convictions as well.

If my opinion is that I believe cheating is detrimental to a relationship, and that honesty is necessary for a relationship to be healthy, it is exactly that. An opinion. Your opinion is that the statement is a judgment -- you perceive it to be so, even when several people are telling you they are not judging. So, you judge the people who don't give you the answer you want by arguing that they "shouldn't be so judgmental"....it's a ridiculous circle. (Yes, that's my opinion again!)

If you ask for opinions on an open forum, you're going to get a wide variety of answers, and they're not all going to stay exactly to the point that you originally referenced. I think it's been a very interesting discussion, but I'll be honest, I'm feeling like I'm starting to get preached at. You may feel that it's wrong to judge another person or an act or whatever, but I happen to feel that God gave us brains, common sense, and wisdom and fully expects us to use all of the above to make serious decisions about right and wrong (i.e. exercising our judgment). I understand that she's your friend and she confided in you, and you believe that this is a one-time thing and that she's shown remorse and fears her marriage will end if this all gets out, but you don't seem to like hearing that her fears are based upon the fact that she 1. did something damaging to her relationship by cheating even it if is just that once and 2. isn't being honest with her spouse, and is not sure when the "right time" would be to come clean. There is never a right time. I'm not judging her, I'm sure that she's probably a very loving, caring, good-for-the-world person. But that doesn't mean that she didn't make a mistake, and that the mistake she made will likely hurt someone she loves. That's not a judgment or condemnation of her, that's a fact, and she stated that to you herself.

thank you ,EZ.

and no hard feeling here either.. and no on the book. but maybe one day.......... lol.

kaplods?

interestng rebuttal. and the what ifs? were/are me being me.

i do wonder (and sometimes out loud ) if what we are so SURE is the right thing? becomes "maybe not so much the right thing" when a crucial bit of info comes to light.

is a bit like a mystery story to me. along the lines of "if this equals that given this and this"? what does it equals if one adds a dash of maybe and splash of "in the past"?

serendipity?

you are asolutely totaly 100% correct!

me saying "if you do this" IS judging!!!

and me pointing a finger at someone (lets say EZ, he is a strong guy lol) and saying "you are doing this and it is wrong cause it goes aganist MY moral code" IS JUDGING.

but me asking when (typed if first but i know EZ is going) he is at the pearly gates and God (this term only used cause EZ is a christian) himself looks EZ in the face and asks him about his treatment of this woman (who is really a metaphor for how society treats US); will EZ be ok with how HIS God percieves his behavior?

that is simply me asking for not a defense of actions but more of "how sure are you that how you are behaving is REALLY how you say/think/believe you believe you should.

in short---you talk the talk but are you gonna walk the walk?

if a person believes that the cheater is morally corrupt (my words-not used by any others) and her only pathway to true forgiveness and redemption and repentance (which HAS been implied) is to tell her spouse and says that? to themselves or others or the cheater?

believing it is a right. we are all entitled to our own beliefs and opinions.

but isnt also a judgement?

and if it is? me saying you are that you are judging is a judgement

so it is a circle. you juding the cheater, me judging you judging the cheater and you judging me for judging you and not judging the cheater.

what if we didnt judge? (unless that is out profession) and just observed? allowed others to go dwn their own path and didnt intefere?

what would happen?

can you legislate morality?
i think not.

do morals influence our laws?
absolutely.

so if the cheater contracted a STD (lets say AIDS) and gave it to her husband and he died.

(this is not true and is used for a reference point ONLY).

was she morally wrong to cheat?
most of us say yes.

was she morally wrong to not tell him?
too many shades of yes,no, maybes and only in this situation to make a absolute statement.

but if the cheaters husband dies cause she cheated and gave him AIDS?
is she a muderess?. and has she broken any laws? and is she now LEGALLy wrong?
i say yes.

but is she MORALLY wrong?
if she knowingly gives him something that could be medically treated and doesnt tell because of repercussions--yes.

if that isnt a possibility (flatout isnt possible in this situation--its my story so go with it a minute-ok)

then i say she has to choose her own morality--i cant cause i am not her.

i say that morals are personally defined and legal ramifications are totally seperate.



and if i was verging on "preachy"

so sorry. i am really enjoying the responses and the twists and tuns the discussion takes.

but i do get that i AM judging when i say and think or feel 'you shouldnt judge the cheater".

does anyone else?

Actually my God will see me as perfect...but only because of the person and work of Jesus Christ

As far as how I view women...well lets just say I like to view women and leave it at that....

Angie sneaks in here from time to time....I know exactly where I stand!

wherever she tells me to

What I want to know now is ............

was the affair with another man or woman?

and

what if that person tells...or are they not involved with someone?

Serendipity...LOVE your posts!

Some of you gals ROCK on your posts here....too many to single out tonight...

back to date night...coming babe....

EZ!!!



i love the way your mind works!!

first i meant when you and God have a face to face about your opinion of "the cheater". i have no doubt that you will feel you are on solid ground morally. you were the best example i could use cause you wont waver.

you WALK the talk.

is a good thing.

and the other person was a man. cheater is a girl. and i dont know if "cheaer with" would tell. i think not.

from what the cheater says about "cheater with"; she was a blip on his radar screen.

she hasnt shared anymore info with me since that initial conversation. she has tried but i tell her i love her and i will always be her friend but SHE has to decide the right and wrong.


she asked me what i would do.

i told her i would answer that in 6 months.

she understood why but was still cranky with me.

I have a headache :P

Ultimately we get a society which stops believing in a common morality. If we're all going to just sit back and observe when someone does something that we see as wrong - something we see as being hurtful to another person or people, or even to the person themselves and keep our opinions to ourselves, it becomes a tacit approval of any and all behavior. Without what you're calling judgement - there is no right and wrong - and hey if you see someone being abused, raped or murdered - who are you to judge - just observe and see what happens.

We know what happens. There's quite a bit of statistical and research data on that one - when people do not "judge" destructive behavior - destructive behavior increases.

Tolerance, compassion, with-holding judgement are only "good" to a point, there's also a point when they become a cop-out, a way for people to shirk social responsibility (not my problem, not my place to judge).

Until fairly recently, "what goes on behind closed doors," wasn't anyone else's business. And spousal, elder, and child abuse were rampant.

I say we are our brother's keepers. We're responsible for each other, and when we see someone being hurt and victimized by someone else, it IS our business. Ideally, interventions are done with compassion to everyone - which is difficult, a pain in the butt and and time-consuming, but to say there are no absolutes and that observing is a virtue - I don't buy it.

I would argue that nearly all laws are not just influenced by morality - most not only reflect, they ARE morality. Laws are created, because we as a society have agreed that some things ARE wrong, and "how wrong" we see them is reflected in the punishments that are assigned to each law (we don't assign the death penalty for unpaid traffic tickets).

Yes, each individual creates their own moral code - and that is a free choice. A person can choose to believe that killing anyone they wish to, any time they wish to, is perfectly ok. They can choose to believe that nothing they do is wrong.

But, society disagrees. A person who has ONLY a personal morality and no social morality is called a sociopath.
_______

What we haven't discussed here, is whether anyone besides the wife is obligated to tell the husband of the affair if she does not?

If you knew that your friend's husband was having an affair, would you have told her?

If she was obsessing about what she should do, and you knew that he had had an affair, would you tell her then?

If you knew that sexually transmitted diseases were definitely involved, would it be your responsibility then?

___

We've talked alot about taking religion out of the equation. We've talked about taking judgement out of the equation. We've talked about taking law out of the equation. We've talked about taking the offended party (the husband) out of the equation.

None of those are possible. They are all invariable linked. Everyone, regardless of religious belief - or lack of religious belief are influenced by the moral code of the society in which they are raised, and the religion and moral codes of their progenitors and their progenitors' progenitors.

We cannot escape social morality, and in virtually all societies the greater good has to be considered. We are obligated to consider the consequences not only of the individual, but to others and the whole group as well.

I would be very angry at any friend (my husband's friend, my friend, our friend) who knew my husband was having an affair, and didn't do anything (confront him, suggest counseling, tell me... something). Not because I would want my husband caught and punished, but because I would want them to care enough about us not to want either of us to be hurt.

I really didn't feel it was appropriate to share my husband and my discussion on this matter, but I think it is pertinent, to show why I believe morality matters (and not just an individual morality, but a group morality).

When we were dating, and first began discussing marriage, I brought the issue up. I told my husband that if there was little chance of him getting caught, and little chance of him having passed on an STD to me, that I would rather NOT know (not a matter of now or later, but a matter of now or never), but if the guilt would not let him choose never, or if there was a chance of someone else telling me, I'd want to hear it from him and the sooner the better.

My husband told me that he thought I was WRONG. He didn't feel that "not telling" should be an option. That whether or not I knew about it, concealing an affair was essentially a lack of trust of the other person and of the marriage. Not any different than hiding excessive expenses on a credit card, or lying about spending the rent money on gambling or drugs.

We agreed that we WOULD tell the other person - not only after hurting the marriage in any way - but when we were tempted to... BEFORE anyone got hurt or would be put in the position of lying.

So far, we haven't had to test our principles. We have made mistakes that can hurt our marriage, and we've not always mentioned it in the temptation stage (though luckily, they've all been very minor blows to our personal integrety and trust... spending on a larger purchase without consulting the other first, or making plans for "us" without the other's input or consent...small things, but if we're not able to be open and honest with small things, what hope do we have for large things).

I don't know what the friend's relationship is with her husband. I don't know whether they discussed their expectations and values with each other (I sure would hope so), but to say the morality of the situation is completely subjective, and open to individual interpretation, for the most part I would passionately disagree.

To a certain extent we all ARE responsible for one another. While we may not be in a position to get involved (if our choice of action, inaction or advice is likely to harm anyone more than help), we can (and maybe are even obligated, depending upon the situation and our own moral code - and the moral code of the society to which we belong) advise the person to carefully consider their choice and the potential consequences.

If that's judgement, so be it. Our society wouldn't last long without it. Anarchy isn't pretty.

In order to survive as a society, some aspects of each individual's moral code have to be congruent with others. Yes, we all have individual flavors, and yes, morality and ethics can be VERY complicated, but at the end of the day, we need to be able to agree that there are some things which as a society we do not find acceptable. Those things tend to be prescribed by law (not always, and sometimes law doesn't catch up with changing morals and vice versa). But we have to have SOMETHING in common, or we end up with a society where everyone is just out for themselves and can justify any behavior, no matter how reprehensible, but simply saying, "Hey, according to my moral code, I'm doing nothing wrong, and you have no right to judge me!"

Really?

Is that the world you want to live in?

You can love the person who is doing something destructive, and still feel that the act they are committing is wrong. They may not agree, but that doesn't mean that what they're doing is morally right because they say so. There are people in the world who either have NO sense of moral imperative (sociopaths), a limited sense of morality, or one in which they can rationalize behavior that even they feel is wrong morally.

BRAVO!!!

Serendipity--very well said! and i dont think i would like a world like that.

the word kaplods used:
ANARCHY
A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder).



is not what i want. but it brings me to the same thought as before.

when do the rules of society begin to infringe on the liberty of the individual?

if everyone in this thread says the cheater should tell?

can we make her?

can we take the decision from her (getting to your questions-kaplods)

are we sure that our following the moral code leads to good choices?

how?

and kaplods?

sigh...

i dunno. i believe i wouldnt want to know. but i am a chicken and hate confrontation. my husband? if it ever happens (i hope never for either of us)- he would tell and it would be best for me to tell.

and would i tell?

again the chicken speaks....if there was a possibility of illness or if i was friends with them both?

i believe i would find a way to work it into the conversation.

would my husband tell?

NOPE.

and he doesnt want to hear from anyone esle.

he will figure it out. (so he says).

that seems contradictory to me.

This moral code that keeps being brought up...sounds a lot like God's Ten Commandments for us..

you know...the laws that ...if we all lived by...

would make the world a better place...

oooooooooooo!

EZ, you are a mind reader.

i have another question in mind concerning those!

but i think i will wait a bit as i certainly am NOT trying to be hurtful.

just thought provoking.

we will see.