Obviously! It should carry MMS and strict for 2nd++ offense..
Yah, first fine, then jail, mild jail time.
I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.
Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.
The pandoras box has been open for a long, long time.law.com Law Dictionary
n. mental suffering which includes fright, feelings of distress, anxiety, depression, grief and/or psychosomatic physical symptoms. It is distinguished from physical pain due to an injury, but it may be considered in awarding damages for physical injury due to a defendant's negligence or intentional infliction of harm.
Where there is no physical injury, damages can still be awarded for mental anguish if it is reasonable to presume such would naturally flow from the incident. Examples: holding a pistol to one's head, any threat of bodily harm when it appears it could be carried out, swinging with a scythe even though the assailant missed, or witnessing injury or death to a loved one.
There are also situations in which the obvious result of the alleged wrongdoing would be mental distress due to embarrassment or damage to one's reputation through libel, and therefore damages can be awarded to the distressed party.
However, there are limits: in general, breach of contract judgments cannot include damages for mental anguish due to the loss of a deal or employment. But then there is the case of the shop which failed to deliver the bridal gown in time for the wedding-mental anguish flows naturally (along with the bride's tears) from such a breach.
See also: damages mental suffering
But unfortunately it really means absolutely nothing in regards to the law, which is what the point I made pertains to.
This has nothing to do with adultery. It relates to divorce. Are you arguing for criminalizing divorce?Never mind the credible research demonstrating that children are worse off in single parent homes. Never mind that statistics showing that they are more likely to be abused sexually, physically and emotionally by mommy’s boyfriends.
I can cite numerous posts of mine where I admit that I have made an error and retracted an argument. If someone can show me logically or legally the stance I hold is incorrect, I do this all the time.No no, Tucker says none of this exists, so it must be true because he said so; and Tucker is always right, just ask him, he'll tell you.
Most recently I made this type of retraction with Sir Loin in an argument about Rush Limbaugh.
I'm not sure where this particular comment is coming from, Jerry. Can you please explain it to me?
So does my example of verbal abuse. And a child is more likely to be aware of one spouse acting in a verbally abusing manner than they would be of infidelity because they are much more likely to directly witness verbal abuse.Adultery destroys the family, the destruction of the family harms everyone immediately involved directly and society by proxy and that is why it is wrong.
Lets assume this is true.It's not my morality; it's not your morality, its objective truth which, yes, does actually exist.
How is adultery worse than verbally denigrating one's spouse (which is legal)? They have similar ramifications, they both destroy the family etc.
Although there is one REMARKABLE difference between the two.
Although adultery is a purely selfish behavior, it is typically not a malicious behavior committed with the intent to cause harm. Whereas verbal abuse is ALWAYS a malicious behavior meant to inflict HARM on the other person.
Why is it that adultery, a non-malicious act, which indeed has victims, but only incidental victims, is being treated as though it is worse than a malicious act that has a direct and intended victims as well as incidental victims.
Common sense indicates that malicious actions are worse than non-malicious actions.
The discussion here is not "Is adultery a bad thing" it's should it be a criminal offense. Obviously when I make a comment in this context, I make it in the legal sense. i.e. "Legally speaking, Adultery is simply a breech of contract. No more, no less."
I didn't necessarily place the term "Legally speaking" into my post since I gathered that it would be assumed by those who read the post since the topic of the thread, the arguments made in that post, and the comments I made regarding the immorality of adultery as well as the comparison to verbal abuse would suggest that the legal sense is what I meant by the comment.
I'm sorry I didn't make it clearer for you.
How unfortunate that you refuse to make a case to support your claims. If I am ignorant then, please, educate me.Your argument is born of gross ignorance and utter denial of documented facts. I can't address it comprehensively as I would have to start with basic sociological concepts which I neither have the time or patents to type nor the casual reader to digest.
Not legally speaking, which was my point. Which is why I made the comparison to an equally vile and disgusting action that is actually protected by the first amendment.You couldn't be more wrong, Tucker. Adultery is so much more than a simple breach of a contract.
Last edited by Tucker Case; 02-11-09 at 03:35 PM.
Tucker Case - Tard magnet.
nm missed your edit...
That said, everyone is responsible for their own actions. If someone cheats on you and your only response is to kill either yourself or your significant other (married or not) then I'd say you have bigger problems than just being cheated on.
As many people have already stated in this thread, life goes on, pick yourself back up and get over it.
Last edited by Arcana XV; 02-11-09 at 03:40 PM.
"Yes, but are you a Protestant atheist or a Catholic atheist?".- Northern Irish joke