Discussions
Would You Cheat If True Love Was Involved?
Posted by AchEmpire • 8/02/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: cheating
We all know love sometimes can control the heart & develops unexpectedly. If you were married, dating, or in a committed relationship & someone enters your life & you both realize chemistry is there & feel something unique would you cheat to see them? If the cheating turned into physical, would you keep it a secret forever if you didn't want to hurt your date, married partner or commited relationship? Explain below.
User Comments
-
Well i cant think of such a relation...-
aslam9895- Then it sounds like this has never happened to you, or someone you know then.
-
-
I think when one is married then one is no longer 'free' to do that. When you start having kids, your lives become entangled in such a level that everything depends on working to make the relationship work. if you want to get involved with chemistry then it is just selfishness. You will only feel so bad when you put your feelings first before others. Unless of course you are in a relationship which is open but that is another ball game which i don't want to talk about.-
In an open relationship, it's not cheating unless you cover it up. And then why would you?
So, yeah, another ball game entirely. -
celticmusicfan- What do you mean by this:
"if you want to get involved with chemistry then it is just selfishness".
Are you familiar with how powerful chemistry is? -
voodooKobra & celticmusicfan- You two should be best friends. I said nothing about open relationship in this discussion.
-
No matter how strong the biochemical attraction to the third party might be, you are already committed-- economically, socially, etc.-- to your significant other. If you are in an absolutely closed relationship, then it is only because both parties agreed to forsake all others. Those are the terms of your relationship, which is a contract-- documented if it's a marriage, verbal if otherwise. If your biochemistry is telling you differently, you have a contractual duty to remove yourself from the presence of the third party.
Or you could always inquire about the possibility of renegotiating the terms of the contract, or annul it entirely. Those are the only 3 options you really have.
To make things interesting, your partner might be open to any combination of the same 3 options.
Enter game theory.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory -
voodooKobra- I'm not married but if I understand marriage doesn't have a CONTRACT, more like vows you don't sign vows in a marriage. The only contracts I know about in marriage are pre-nups & post-nups. Sounds like we're not connecting again. First you say
You give treats to your women to romance them now contract for marriage? If you keep talking like that any women you date, committ or marry will definitely cheat on you. -
[I'm not married but if I understand marriage doesn't have a CONTRACT, more like vows you don't sign vows in a marriage.]
Marriage license. Legally, it's a contract. QED.
[You give treats to your women to romance them]
Will you stop being an overly emotional, illiterate tart and try to comprehend the concepts I present in clear English?
I don't romance anyone. It's a waste of time. However, I recognize that some people don't agree with that. For them, I recommended not overdoing it. You somehow took that to mean I treat my women like dogs and keep them in a kennel bound by a contract and with a gag ball or something. -
voodooKobra- A marriage license doesn't address cheating. What planet are you from? Marriage license if I'm not mistaken includes prior names of the husband & wife & family informtation. Once again pre-nups & post-nups are LEGAL CONTRACTS and if they both address cheating then the one caught cheating is bound to the legal terms of those contracts, not MARRIAGE LICENSE.
-
[A marriage license doesn't address cheating.]
No, but a marriage license ensures that the verbal agreement between the two parties is reinforced by a legally verifiable written contract.
The important thing is the social [verbal] contract-- pick up a fucking philosophy book one day, will you?-- between the two parties.
Both people KNOW THE TERMS OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP. If it's an open relationship, you'd have to go out of your way to be guilty of cheating. If it's a closed relationship, then both parties acknowledge this fact.
For everything else, read my previous posts. -
voodookobra- Wow you are irate today aren't you?
"The important thing is the social [verbal] contract-- pick up a fucking philosophy book one day, will you?-- between the two parties".
Am I pulling your chain? Also I don't need to pick up a philosophy book. I took phil 2301 back in freshman year in college. -
[Also I don't need to pick up a philosophy book. I took phil 2301 back in freshman year in college.]
That's a non sequitur. Also, my statement was rhetorical. It was meant to demonstrate that you are failing to understand a very simple philosophical approach to answering your question.
[Wow you are irate today aren't you?]
This is how I always am. -
voodookobra- Lets see you said about me:
~You, on the other hand, show your flagrant irrationality~.
This is how you try to deflate your debate with me you orginally started about "True Love"? I'm very disappointed -
[This is how you try to deflate your debate with me you orginally started about "True Love"? I'm very disappointed]
1. Wrong spot.
2. Passive aggression does not a rebuttal make.
-
-
@voodooKobra Oh boy! You just took the words out of my mouth and so much better. I totally agree.
-
[Would You Cheat If True Love Was Involved?]
What is "True Love?" It's hard to answer a question if the terms are not clearly defined.
Are you referring to universal love or egocentric love? Egocentric love is the love wherein one says, "The bond between me and another individual makes that person mean more to me than the rest of the universe." I would argue that universal love is more deserving of the title "true love."-
voodooKobra- Don't use reverse psychology on me. You said:
What is "True Love?" It's hard to answer a question if the terms are not clearly defined.
The term is only what YOU make it out to be, not someone else. Sounds like you have'nt experienced true love yet. Go back and re-read "Why Can't Men Stay Romantic" & then you will eventually find true love. -
I'm taking the devil's advocate approach to the implied definition of "true love," and that's your response? Your attempt to debate my point was an appeal to anecdotal evidence? I'm disappointed.
Edit to add: Most people in your situation would try to make the case for "love between two individuals" being a truer, purer form of love than "love and appreciation for the entire universe." You, on the other hand, show your flagrant irrationality.
[Go back and re-read "Why Can't Men Stay Romantic" & then you will eventually find true love.]
False cause fallacy, and maybe even argument from ignorance. Nobody has read that and immediately found "true love," and even if those two events did follow sequentially, it doesn't necessitate that one would cause the other. No data, no logical connection.
On a final note, I don't want a damn thing to do with egocentric love. If it happens, it happens, but I'm not going to put any effort into trying to force it to happen. -
voodooKobra- No it's you always trying to debate me.
I'm sorry you're disappointed, but stop trying to debate me, you will not win.
"I do notice something about you unique, but I haven't figured it out yet". -
[I'm sorry you're disappointed, but stop trying to debate me, you will not win.]
That's an interesting claim. First, it implies that debates are "winnable." This is the internet, and as past history would indicate, they just perpetuate until one side stops posting but has too much pride to concede defeat. Secondly, it claims that your previous claims have all been sound, which is a prerequisite for winning a formal debate. They haven't been. And finally, it implies that "debating you" is my intention. My intention is to have a rational discussion, but you are persistently unable to carry one, so it evolves into a debate every time I try to show you the flaw in your logic.
["I do notice something about you unique, but I haven't figured it out yet".]
A quote without attribution? Is this supposed to mean something to me? -
voodookobra- STOP debating & challenging me. It's non-sense, what's your point? To prove your "Egotistical"
-
No, my point is to push you to examine other ideas, to better explain your own, to detach your own ego from your ideas and learn that a challenge to your ideas and beliefs is not an attack on you. This is a discussion forum, not a grab-ass forum. If you don't want something to be discussed, you would be ill-advised to post it.
-
How many people have you started fights with now, AchE? I think it must be some kind of record...
-
voodookobra- you said:
No, my point is to push you to examine other ideas, to better explain your own, to detach your own ego from your ideas and learn that a challenge to your ideas and beliefs is not an attack on you. This is a discussion forum, not a grab-ass forum. If you don't want something to be discussed, you would be ill-advised to post it.
Now let me disect this:
1. my point is to push you to examine other ideas- you don't push me to do anything, you got that?
2. to detach your own ego from your ideas- When did you become Dr. phil? Stop TRYING!
3. This is a discussion forum, not a grab-ass forum- Don't get this?
Don't continue to show irate through my discussions as away to release your situations from your other egotistical worlds! -
[When did you become Dr. phil? Stop TRYING!]
Considering that I'm not a fraud, never.
[This is a discussion forum, not a grab-ass forum- Don't get this?]
Grab-ass refers to unnecessarily sensitive social rituals-- such as telling white lies and sugarcoating facts to make people more comfortable in otherwise stressful situations. You know, bullshit.
[you don't push me to do anything, you got that?]
If I don't push you to stop being stupid, and you don't voluntarily stop being stupid, then you're going to continue to be stupid and I, as well as many others, are going to have to put up with the aftershocks of your willful ignorance and stubborn stupidity. -
hahahaha! Hey AchE, stick around...you are too funny! haha!
-
-
If you were married, dating, or in a committed relationship & someone enters your life & you both realize chemistry is there & feel something unique would you cheat to see them?
No.
If you are married, you are married. Period. If it was not true love back then, why did you marry in the first place?
If you are in a committed relationship, you are in a committed relationship. Period. If it was not true love when you committed yourself back then, why did you commit yourself in the first place?
If you are dating, that's hardly a relationship (IMO), so I don't see the question as relevant.
Anyway, if this suddenly-comes-along-true-love person would appear, I wouldn't even consider 'cheating'. Rather, I would ask myself, why would that love be truer than the one I am in now and will the same thing not happen again later with an even truer love?
Cheating is not an option. Breaking off a relationship or divorcing is an option. That should be what you should ponder, not whether to cheat or not.-
husdal- You said:
If you are married, you are married. Period. If it was not true love back then, why did you marry in the first place?
My Response- Sometimes people get married for the wrong reasons. Like money, looks, education status, gettig pregnant, etc. Once this happens they discover the real true love they thought they had wasn't there true love after all, when some else so suddenly with chemistry enters there life . This causes cheating. This may also be applied in a commited relationship also. Once again chemistry is very powerful, & if the journey finds it's way into yor life, why not ask is this my calling for real true love? Chemistry doesn't happen with every one you meet, so this should apply to your:
If it was not true love when you committed yourself back then, why did you commit yourself in the first place? -
If they got married for the wrong reasons, what would convince a person that the second time would be right?
If they're not rational enough to assess this question, it would be irresponsible to cheat, annul the marriage, or remain in the marriage. The only way to win is not to play. -
Even if I got married for the wrong reasons, that doesn't make make cheating any righter. Once I realize that I am in a wrong relationship, the only answer is to get out. Then I am free to pursue this 'true' love. Not before.
-
husdal- So if money was involved & you had NO pre-nup you're saying you would leave giving your 50% if you were worth $2,500,000? I think like most rich men you would continue to hang in there & cheat till infinity.
-
$1,250,000 net worth for a divorce, or $50,000 for a hitman?
I think a lot of rich men go for the implied third option here. -
voodooKobra- You said:
$1,250,000 net worth for a divorce, or $50,000 for a hitman?
I think a lot of rich men go for the implied third option here.
Lets see stop challenging me. The $2,500,000 could be liquid & it's part of his fortune in a seperate bank account. My point is if alot of money & assets are involved people think twice before they leave. They just go ahead & cheat. -
How is that a challenge? It's an elaboration. I'm mentioning options you neglected to consider.
Why do you take everything personally? My grammar is unambiguous, so if there's a mistake in comprehension, I don't think it's due to an error on my behalf. -
Yes, if that other person really was true love, why would I care about the money? And if I were that rich, it would be stupid of me not to have a pre-nup, or at least a post-nup.
-
Because she's an attention whore...
-
husdal- You said:
Yes, if that other person really was true love, why would I care about the money? And if I were that rich, it would be stupid of me not to have a pre-nup, or at least a post-nup.
Lets me disect this you said:
1. it would be stupid of me not to have a pre-nup, or at least a post-nup.
My Response-Most people don't think this way if they got rich during THE MARRIAGE! Be open-minded, ok? -
[Be open-minded, ok?]
KBLAM! I think that was the irony detection part of my brain.
Did you-- who objects every time I mention something that doesn't fit your expectations (such as mentioning the possibility of murdering the undesired spouse)-- just tell someone else to be open-minded?
Ho-ly shit. -
Unintentional Irony Overload
System Failure -
@AchEmire
The opening question was 'Would you cheat...? I answered what I would do. What most people do is besides the question.
-
-
AchEmpire Strikes Back?
-
Epicharis- No I'm not striking back, only shooting daggers
-
Well how about you stop that and behave like an adult? People disagree with you, that doesn't mean they are trying to rile you.
-
And in some cases aren't even disagreeing at all.
-
voodookobra- You said:
"who objects every time I mention something that doesn't fit your expectations"
STOP TRYING TO DIAGNOIS ME! your not a DOCTOR!
Epicharis- I'm not ignoring you. Voodookobra is egotistical & his behavior requires me to deflate it by constantly challenging him. -
[STOP TRYING TO DIAGNOIS ME!]
[Voodookobra is egotistical & his behavior requires me to deflate it by constantly challenging him.]
Wow. Either you're on your way to usurping Stephen Colbert as the King of Irony (which would be really ironic since you're female), or I'm staring in the face of cognitive dissonance. -
voodookbra- Honestly, what is you're point constantly flaunting your egotistical behavior on this disussion? Challenging me is only going to cause you to get burn out. I don't want to see 1,000 post on this discussion with just you & I. So don't push me, because I won't back down with you.
-
You keep labeling me as egotistical, but I have yet to say anything self-aggrandizing in the slightest. What are you basing this on?
-
voodooKobra- Read this discussion, then count how many times your face shows up, then go look in the mirror & ask yourself wow I am "Egostistical" No one else is doing this but you
-
Participation in a discussion board... automatically makes me egotistical?
There is so much wrong with that statement that I scarcely know how to properly address it. So, I'll let Wikipedia do it for me:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_cause -
@Crazy McScrewLoose (AchEmpire)
you don't really have a grasp on reality, do you? -
"Voodookobra is egotistical & his behavior requires me to deflate it by constantly challenging him."
Wow. I missed this the other day. Seriously considering taking a few days off work and grabbing some popcorn and...you know...camping supplies...and waiting around to see Ach "deflate Voodookobra's ego". Ach, I think you're going to need bigger guns--preferably ones with recognizable spelling.
-
-
No I can't do that, I respect the one I love and love conquer all things...
much care
jolinarodriguez -
AchE are you ignoring me? That makes me sad...
-
Epicharris- No I'm not ignoring you, but until voodookobra's irate behavior calms down his comments will continue to be flames of fire for me to address.
-
AchE: I've already addressed the "irate" claim before, but in case you skimmed over it, allow me to elaborate more clearly why you're wasting your time hoping that my "irate behavior" will calm down.
You see this? This post? My previous posts? Every post I've made in response to you that has sounded irate?
That's me being tranquil. I'm not irate. I'm not angry. I'm slightly agitated because you keep being insufferably annoying and willfully ignorant, but I'm nowhere near irate. I am not even in the vicinity of peeved. Miffed? Perhaps. But definitely not irate.
This is just who I am. -
voodookobra I said this stop ignoring the main part with you see below:
Read this discussion, then count how many times your face shows up, then go look in the mirror & ask yourself wow I am "Egostistical" No one else is doing this but you -
[Read this discussion,]
Done.
[then count how many times your face shows up,]
Zero. That's not my face. For more info:
www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/the-story-behind-voodookobras-avatar
[then go look in the mirror & ask yourself wow I am "Egostistical" No one else is doing this but you]
First, your grammar is terrible. Second, "Wow, I am 'egotistical,'" is not a question. -
voodookobra- You said:
First, your grammar is terrible. Second, "Wow, I am 'egotistical,'" is not a question.
I could care less what you think about my grammar. This is a forum to be fun not forum for egotistical gerks to corret grammar constantly. Another thing you're not my:
1. Boyfriend
2. lover
3. Soul Mate
4. True Love
5. & I'm not intimate with you
So honestly i could care less your words to me. Go ride some else's coat tale -
[Another thing you're not my:...]
You're correcting a mistake that I have not made.
[Go ride some else's coat tale]
You clearly do not know what that expression means. -
voodkoobra- Please stop with trying to exhaust and drain me emotionally with your egotistical behavior. You remind me of my ex.
-
Even, for the sake of being charitable, if I were egotistical on some level, it is completely irrelevant to this discussion because I have not expressed myself as such. If you can't justify the label, it's the wrong label.
[You remind me of my ex.]
Who cares? Your ex isn't relevant. Even so, your logic appears to be:
Kobra reminds me of X
X was Egotistical
Therefore, Kobra is Egotistical
That's not how it works, lady. I'm pretty sure you're committing the fallacy of accident-- based on a shaky association, no less. This is NOT an example of sound rational thinking.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_%28fallacy%29
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundness -
voodookobra- What is your point challenging me on each comment and all this back & fourth? No one else is doing this, and this discussion isn't called
~AchEmpire vs, Voodookobra~
Stop it already you're acting like a 5 year old. -
Is such ageism really warranted in this situation? I know 14 year-olds who are more logical than you, and most 14 year-olds are crazy because they're going through puberty.
[No one else is doing this]
No one else is online, save for a few very passive members who are too entertained by your incessant irrationality and placated by their nonconfrontational natures to step in. More will sign on throughout the day. It won't just be me who finds you ridiculous, I assure you. -
voodookobra- Your comment should dismiss you, you said:
[No one else is doing this]
No one else is online, save for a few very passive members who are too entertained by your incessant irrationality and placated by their nonconfrontational natures to step in.
This you do the same & move on -
[This you do the same & move on]
I know you hate having your grammar corrected, but I haven't the slightest inkling what this sentence is getting at. Would you care to rephrase that? -
Epicharis- You're not making sense, & I'm not crazy.
-
You are a complete nutcase. Please get some help.
-
-
Oh Boy *runs for cover*
-
flames of fire ??? anyone bring marshmallows???
-
-
AchE lives in PretendLand, where AchE's opinion is Fact, and any logical approach to discussing anything with her is immediatately taken as aggression, stupidity, or egocentricity, whether those labels are relevant or not.-
hatingtherain- You don't even know me & quickly to judge. Are you really reflecting yourself through your own words you just spoke?
-
HtR: That's a rather direct personal statement about her, but on the other hand, it's largely true. She seems pretty delusional.
-
[Are you really reflecting yourself through your own words you just spoke?]
Why do you insist on trying to sound like a psychologist when you clearly do not know the terms?
By the by, the term is "project," not "reflect," for this specific instance. Also, psychology isn't impressive. -
No, AchE, I'm just being a bitch because you're annoying me.
-
voodookobra- Yous said:
Why do you insist on trying to sound like a psychologist when you clearly do not know the terms?
Question is why are you questioning me about trying to be a psychologist when I'm not, but you're acting like a psychotherapist posting personality tests, which I won't take? -
[you're acting like a psychotherapist posting personality tests, which I won't take?]
Logician.
...
Psychotherapist.
...
Sorry, I'm not seeing the equivalence. What in the hell are you blabbering about? I haven't posted any personality tests in this thread. -
AchE
Try at least listening to what Voodookobra says to you, because he's smart, and he make sense.
You take it as aggression, when everyone else "get's it". You don't. At least you don't seem to. Maybe you just like to argue. -
voodookobra- I thought you let up & stopped. I'm curious but what zodiac sign are you? Are you by any chance a Leo or Scorpio?
-
Sorry, I live in the 21st Century where rational people don't believe in astrology. But if you think it matters, my birthday is October 12.
-
voodookobra- So I'm not rational? I only asked your astrology sign because of being curious about something, and my birthday is April 3.
-
Based on your behavior here, no, you are not rational.
I've demonstrated errors in your reasoning on multiple occasions. Press Ctrl+F and type in fallacy in the search bar if you're curious of exactly where I did. -
voodookobra- Hoestly I could care a rats a** about you saying:
Based on your behavior here, no, you are not rational.
you have pushed me over IRATE saying this sh*t! -
That's sort of unfair, isn't it, Ach? After all, you ASKED him whether he meant to suggest that you were irrational. He only provided the clarification you requested. Why did you ask if you didn't want to know? (That's not a particularly rational act, do you think?)
-
oh my ... I agree with HTR, she hit the nail right on the head .. You seem to bring up these discussions as I mentioned BEFORE .. and don't really listen or care about anyone's opinion. From everything I've read here, you just seem to enjoy trying to get on top of the discussion ...
Why engage anyone else if your opinion is the only one that matters to you??
-
-
The sole thought that springs to mind is the sheer amount of energy and effort that brought us to this moment. Scientists have worked for years to harness the power of electricity, invent the cathode ray tube, the liquid crystal display, create the computer using the valve, then the transistor and then finally the microchip. Tim Berners Lee worked in a nuclear laboratory and came up with the world wide web. Other scientists came up with fibre optic lines to carry these messages in an instant around the globe. Men of vision and genius and courage invested time, effort, money over centuries to bring us to this point, right here, right now.
Ouch.-
Nah, all the time, effort, and money invested was to bring us to a point in time 30 years from now when my inventions are on the market and my life's ambitions (which include quantum teleportation and solving the energy crisis) are fulfilled.
That, or some point beyond then. -
I'll settle for solving the energy crisis, VK.
-
I won't.
As long as I have the ideas, I'll make something of them. -
voodookobra- What is your purpose of this you just said:
~when my inventions are on the market and my life's ambitions (which include quantum teleportation and solving the energy crisis) are fulfilled. That, or some point beyond then~.
I was right you are egotistical, this has nothing to do with this discussion. It's time you see a psychotherapist -
I've just made an attempt to cool this discussion down, AchEmpire, and was having some success. Thanks for flicking a match back into the proverbial petrol.
-
How very predictable, AchE.
-
greencurmudgeon- Your friend voodookobra will not let up & continues to challenge me, so if he decides to continue these comments with egotistical behavior, then so be it. He will not win anything with me.
-
It has nothing to do with my ego, pride, arrogance, self-worth, confidence, or any perception thereof. This has to do with you making statements which are textbook examples of unsound reasoning and me calling you on them because that's what I do.
-
AchEmpire -
If you can't take a few knocks, you're going to find this place will elevate your blood pressure to the point you'll be spurting plasma out of your ears.
If you are really secure in yourself, then what he says really shouldn't matter to you. Consequently, the more you respond to him, the more it speaks of your own inability to let things go. -
greencurmudgeon- You said:
Consequently, the more you respond to him, the more it speaks of your own inability to let things go.
Why not reverse this comment you just said back over to him? Letting up is what he wants from me, & it's not going to happen. -
No, not really. What I want from you is rational discourse, not your "I project my ego onto my ideas and get overly defensive" crap.
-
AchEmpire -
SO basically you're going to get into a long, protracted flame war, which is already irritating a substantial number of posters. To prove...what?
If you don't let it go, the final result will be something I suggest which will not be to your liking.
As this conversation is apparently a run in a hamster wheel, I am ending it at this point. Thanks. -
voodookobra- I really don't understand why are you concerned about me. Just stop posting, & let others comment on the discussion, & your comment:
No, not really. What I want from you is rational discourse, not your "I project my ego onto my ideas and get overly defensive" crap.
Then don't bother to comment on my discussions if you can't take the fire -
This isn't "not being able to take the fire." That's your issue. You can't handle criticism, or even comments.
-
-
To answer your question
no-
hatingtherain- Ok
-
-
If I thought I was in love with someone else, I would end my current relationship. In fact, if the chemistry was strong enough that I wanted to sleep with another person, I'd end my current relationship or end the association with that person. Cheating has that name for a reason. It's dirty, low-down, and bad, and not in a good, bluesy, 12-bar way.-
legbamel- Ok
-
-
"First, your grammar is terrible."
Please...I can't take it anymore!-
Epicharis - Then don't, I'm not here to impress you.
-
No, you're here to argue as much as you possibly can with as many people as you possibly can. Why don't you start a thread and just argue with yourself? Then at least each participant in the argument would actually be arguing.
-
-
It depends.-
Drew- Finally someone not picking on me. Explain your theory.
-
-
This made my brain hurt. -
If I was married and suddenly found a person with whom I have amazing chemistry, I would have three choices.
1) I ignore the chemistry. I'm married, and hormones aren't worth losing my wife over.
2) I end the marriage.
3) I act like a selfish idiot and cheat on my wife.
Option 3 is not really an option, in my opinion. I wouldn't cheat if I was married or in a serious relationship, and I wouldn't get married to begin with if I didn't think that person was the perfect one for me.-
Rainhat- So if option 3 isn't really an option then why did you list it? Sounds like you may like option 3, since you went further into trying to discuss it
-
Ache, option 3 is an option because you can choose to follow that path. The fact that the possibility exists does in no way mean that I would even consider it if I were faced with that situation. And how does listing 3 options imply that I like the one I dismiss the most...?
-
Rainhat- Are you trying to do reverse psyschology? No need to re ask me the original question I spoofed you with
-
How dare you to imply that option 3 is appealing to Mr Rain Hat, he is trying to answer your ridonkulous questions in a more logical manner than you deserve.
-
crpitt- So the question really is, are you actually provoked because you believe in option 3? I don't see you bringing up options 1 & 2 as back up for this discussion
-
So, if I note that the option to feed said spouse Dran-O and making it look like a terrible plumbing accident exists, that means that I would like to do so? I hardly think so. That's like saying that my acknowledging the existence of tapeworms means that I would like to have one.
-
legbamel- ?
-
The village is on the phone
-
@crpitt
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA -
lmao!
-
-
Nope "true love" is never a function of (and can't survive in an environment of) lies, deception and harm to other people. If it were "true love", it wouldn't inspire/invite those things. True love inspires us to be better people, not more selfish, dishonest ones.
-
MadameX- Well said about true love
-
-
I've just read this entire thread and I don't think the Marx Bros. ever had a better script. I think we should start filming right away. It's been twenty minutes of straight laughs for me.
(You think VK would agree to play himself?)-
I second that wholeheartedly and hope that all the cast stays on BC forever. This is way too entertaining!
-
nothingprofound- I tried to calm voodookobra down, but he kept challenging my comments.
-
Kobra is ALWAYS calm. That's what drives some people (maybe you're one of them?) crazy. The fact that he's challenging someone doesn't mean he's upset--he just has a solid relationship with analytical reasoning.
-
Ah ha! Now I get it! You don't like people challenging your opinions...well you are in the wrong place, because that's what we do here.
-
Epi you are wrong. -
Why are you challenging me, you deadbeat? You're so egotistical.
-
I don't understand.
-
You're both wrong. And egotistical. And why do you challenge my spoofed reversed psychology by provocation?
-
I am always right. Thus, you are wrong. Please do not challenge me. You do not want to challenge me.
-
MadameX- Ok
-
-
*and the camera continues to roll*
-
HEY!
Get that mother ******** camera out of my mother ****** face you g** damn **** ****** -
But DB, you're so photogenic. Besides, I know you're dying to be in my movie. (I took Reverse Psychology 101.)
-
I'm just aiming for more air time.
-
-
No, I would never cheat on my husband. Never, no matter what. -
I am beginning to think that this doctor of yours is married, but you think its okay to engage in relations with him because it is true love (potential cash cow).
-
Hmnnnnn. Methinks Claire might just be on to something!
-
Wait.
The doctor she is 'seeing' is actually her psychotherapist. And by 'seeing' I mean paying him for sessions. -
Well that would explain why he makes so much money...
-
crpitt- I never said he was my true love, he reminds me of my ex who I was suppose to marry back in 2007. Doctor is divorced, he told me, & I looked him up already.
-
dbowles1017- you said:
Wait.
The doctor she is 'seeing' is actually her psychotherapist. And by 'seeing' I mean paying him for sessions.
Maybe he is my psychotherapist? Does it matter? -
Well, Ach--it WOULD matter, because if he were your psychotherapist and dating you, it would make him an unethical QUACK!
-
I'm glad you can read, here's a cookie.
-
melindaville- He isn't my psychotherapist, I was provoking dbowles1017. Doctors will loose their license if they date or sleep with their patients
-
I'm unprovokable.
-
-
The lady is not for turning. Give it your best shots, guys, but I actually think she's winning.
-
nothingprofound- I'm not trying to win anything, just giving my voice of words
-
-
I'm in a relationship, but I already cheated on my bf with dbowles. I just couldn't resist.-
It takes 2 to tango.
-
Well, aspot, you just proved it. Brains aren't everything.
-
aspotofblog- How funny ha ha
-
Well, what could you do? The chemistry took over your brain and made you do it.
-
Ache, what are you trying to say? I don't understand.
-
dbbowles1017 & rainhat- Why are you too even trying to comment? Both of you pick on me like the others, & then laugh about it. No need to further this
-
Are you saying we're not allowed to comment in discussion threads? I don't take no orders from no one!
-
-
I'm dumb as a brick, so I generally think with my vagina. I just couldn't help myself. It was an accident, I slipped and fell onto him. And dbowles, you say it takes two to tango. You're right. You were very unresponsive that day.
-
It's because when you slipped, I tried to catch you, and then I hit my head on the kitchen counter. So I was kind of unconscious.
-
-
And in the past I cheated on all my bf's because other hot men forced me to have sex with them.
-
Exactly. At least you still had a pulse.
-
Yes, I did.
-
dbowles1017- You did what?
-
I e-sexed aspotofblog on accident, and was knocked out during the process due to me hitting my head on the counter, but I still had a pulse.
-
-
Where are you dbowles? Achempire is asking you a question.
-
I didn't want to answer it...
-
-
achempire: Would you cheat on your partner?
-
aspotofblog- No, I would try to work it out before it hits the cheating phase.
-
-
If true love was involved in what?-
Involved in whatever kind of relationship you have, dating, marriage, relationship, etc.
-
-
without reading any other replies beyond the first two:
you asked: ". If you were married, dating, or in a committed relationship & someone enters your life & you both realize chemistry is there & feel something unique would you cheat to see them?"
my answer:
no, I wouldn't act on any chemistry felt with someone else if I am involved with someone already. It would go against my personal beliefs and morals to do anything like that. If I felt that I even had the slightest urge to do anything like that I'd give it consideration, end whatever relationship I was in and make sure my heart and head were on right before starting something new. It would, in my opinion, be disrespectful to the person I was already involved with and if my relationship were that easily threatened then maybe it wasn't so strong and I'd owe it to my partner to end it for their sake and mine.
No, I've never felt that way nor have I ever had a chemistry with someone new that made me reconsider our relationship. But once upon a time my(then) spouse did choose to get involved with someone else while still married to and living with me, I would never do that to the person I know I love. Not only wouldn't I willingly do it, I really doubt I'd be tempted to. Not just because I know how it feels to be disrespected and betrayed and to have a promise made in marriage treated as disposable but also because I can't imagine looking at any other man the same way as I look at my now-other half.
my apologies if I've copied someone else's thoughts.-
Wow, that's really respectable. I admire you for that.
You get those that never ever cheat, no matter what, because it's against their morals, those that cheat and don't feel guilty, those that cheat and feel guilty and those that thought they'd never cheat, but end up cheating on their partners. -
Floormodel- Thanks for your comment, & I pray for you to find love again.
aspotoflog- You said:
You get those that never ever cheat, no matter what, because it's against their morals, those that cheat and don't feel guilty, those that cheat and feel guilty and those that thought they'd never cheat, but end up cheating on their partners.
This is really interesting, because everyone falls into one of the examples you listed in your comment. -
wow, those prayers must work retroactively, I'm perfectly happy with the man who tolerates me and has for the past 8 years my divorce was 20 years ago.
aspotoflog left one off that list:
people who never even consider cheating because the thought of it never crosses their minds.
-
-
Hey, it isn't just for South Carolina governors off on corporate welfare expiditions in exotic locales! -
No. It is dishonorable and awful, especially the married case. Once you give yourself to someone, they own you, period. This world has gotten way too superficial without people adding to it with equally superficial and selfish irrational behavior.-
jeremyjanson- I agree
-
especially if one is bought with a handsome sum... appearently. o_0
-
-
jeremyjanson: I wouldn't go as far as saying that you own that person. People aren't possessions.
-
It's inaccurate to call them possesions because they also own the person who owns them. You should dominate her/him, and he/she should dominate you.
-
-
I dont think I will take the risk at all. (If my true love is involved) -
tough one. don't know that either. No secrets with the one who brought ya' to the dance.-
tkrawforabr - I don't get your response?
-
-
-
crpitt - How funny of you. Hope you had a great Thanksgiving.
-
-
Well first of all, if I'm just "dating" someone, then there is no cheating. Its casual. But if I was involved to the point of commitment...then no I wouldn't cheat. I would leave that person, and then be with the other person. Why would I want to drag someone along my ride to true love. Let them go and find their own.-
lotusb - Hi so if you are just dating then it's not cheating?
-
Well what does cheating mean? Breaking the assumed or agreed upon rules of a relationship. If the relationship is drinks on Friday or casual sex or lunch dates...then it's just dating. Once monogomy is expected it's usually considered to be a relationship. So no, if your just dating someone there is not cheating.
-
lotusb- Why would you assume dating is all about what you said below?
If the relationship is drinks on Friday or casual sex or lunch dates...then it's just dating.
You could be dating someone, but still laying up with them in bed all day & night and just gazing and talking after sex that's not considered casual sex but rather making love, so we all see dating alittle different. -
Well...I wasn't typing in a definition. I just mean generally "dating" is considered to be Pre-Commitment. When you say "I'm dating someone" people don't typically think it's super serious. I'm not saying that there is no intamacy. But if two people are THAT interested, usually they head into exclusivity.
-
lotusb - What do you mean by that interested in someone?
-
If two people are so consumed that they only want to be together, then they will decide to only want to be together.
-
-
If "Love" causes you to cheat it's not love. It's lust.-
yahshar - How is it lust if they love each other? I think lust runs out fast, if this is still going on after a year then it's not lust anymore.
-
I disagree with that. I think love can happen whenever there is room for it to happen. If it happens outside of your already defined commitment, then the one your considering cheating ON is the situation lacking something.
-
lotusb - it doesn't have to be the other person lacking, it just could be time for God to change your journey's and destineys up alittle bit for life growing.
-
Define Love? Is it having things in common, is it a funny feeling you both have when together, is it looking forward to your next visit, is it the excitement of doing something you shouldn't be?
I just think using the word love in this context is a bit off. I don't think people fall in love so easily. I think it is first a infatuation or liking that develops into other things including lust, before it is truly love. -
yahshar - You said:
is it a funny feeling you both have when together, is it looking forward to your next visit, is it the excitement of doing something you shouldn't be?
So what are you calling what you just said? -
ACH, in my opinion it means something is lacking. Which is why journeys change, people follow their hunger.
-
@yashar
Love (IMO) is a foundation for life. It's an understanding and over all acceptance of someone. It's unconditional, its reaffirmed. Its not something that is a cure for anyting or a solution to lonliness. Love is just a foundation for life with someone else. It is not the end all be all, not the beginning or end. It can last a day or a decade, but above all else love is totally selfless. -
lotusb - So if they are following their hunger and it's the same as the last, then what is that called? "A upgraded journey"
-
"I think it is first a infatuation or liking that develops into other things including lust, before it is truly love."
True love would keep you in the commitment you were in. Now if you choose to go outside of your arrangement and do something else, that's fine. Just don't call it love. What about the "love" for that other person? Where did it go? Or was it ever love? If it's true love, I don't think there would be any room for cheating to come in. -
yahshar- You said: Now if you choose to go outside of your arrangement and do something else, that's fine. Just don't call it love. What about the "love" for that other person? Where did it go? Or was it ever love? If it's true love, I don't think there would be any room for cheating to come in.
So you are saying arrangements as to what? -
@ ACH
"upgraded journey"? No, I mean honestly call it what you want. BASICALLY I'm saying that if two people have yet to agree upon monogomy then sleeping/seeing/dating someone else as well is not cheating, because there is no RULE set.
-
-
Adultery
* The following questionnaire is designed to assess the likelihood of you having an affair
* It was written in conjunction with Dr Glenn D Wilson of the London Institute of Psychiatry
* The test takes 5 minutes
www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/mind/surveys/adultery/ -
Does it matter?
The real question is, what do you do if someone new comes along that has you questioning cheating on the person you cheated with?
-
yahshar - So you're saying if you were involved with someone for lets say 14 years faithfully and all of a sudden someone appears in your life 14 years later and cause similar chemistry you call that lust? I would suggest it's more than lust and rather "True Love" crafting it's way through your life a second time around to show you the aftermath of your new journey being lined up.
-
Its a slippery slope. Some people are just non committal and use Lust or awesome feelings for someone new as a reason to leave or cheat. I think if you commit to something your acknowleging that it wont always be easy and your acknowleging that there will be times when you might be tempted to walk away. Commitment is not just about the day you say I want to be wit you and how cute it sound and how nice it is to have someone, the other side of that is that you STAY even when its hard to. Love is the greatest challenge, and unfortunately not many people can handle it.
-
AchE,
If that's what you choose to call it. It sounds like a excuse or license to do whatever you want to do to me.
lotusb,
Well said. -
yahshar - You can't control the heart we only get 1 soul mate/true love.
-
Not true. You can't stop your emotions, but you can control them.
Where does it say you only get one soul mate? -
Yea that one soul mate thing is total BS....what are you like living your life according to Lifetime Movie Network?
-
yahshar - You said: Where does it say you only get one soul mate?
So you think one has more than 1 soulmate? That's odd coming from you since you think lust only occurs in cheating and not "True Love" steaming from the cheating -
lotusb - Lifetime movie network? Not everyone has to agree on 1 soulmate/true love, but it's different with me.
-
To believe the One Soul Mate idea is to believe that we have no choice in the matter. That we have no control.
I believe we have many choices and this is what makes it so much more meaningful when despite our desires, hungers, and selfish ambitions we choose to love one person and share our life's journey with that person forever.
I would still love to know where you read that you only get one soul mate from?
-
-
true love is no excuse for cheating.
we can find many soul mates in life, as we mature we change and our soul mate needs also change.
it is selfish to cheat, end what you have and then start something new but watch out because you may be giving up your true "soul mate" to follow your lust.-
Floormodel - So what is your definition of lust?
-
lust is to have a eager and avid desire for someone, usually related in some way to sexual desire and pleasure.
-
Floormodel- ok so then yahshar said:
is it a funny feeling you both have when together, is it looking forward to your next visit, is it the excitement of doing something you shouldn't be?
Then what do you call this? -
lust: selfish
love: selfless -
"is it a funny feeling you both have when together, is it looking forward to your next visit, is it the excitement of doing something you shouldn't be?"
well if you're doing something you shouldn't be then you have to ask yourself why you're doing it...is it the naughtiness, the danger, the avoidance of a real full time relationship? -
lotusb - How is lust selfish if is what causes part of the relationship to reach to the "True Love" level? Everyone has lust in their relationships.
-
if you're doing the lust-dance with someone while in a commited relationship with someone else then it is wrong. If you respect your partner and yourself then end the first before acting on the second. It's that simple.
-
Add Your Comment
This discussion has been locked.
