• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should adultery be a criminal offense punishable by jailtime?

Should adultery be a criminal offense punishable by jailtime?

  • Obviously! It should carry MMS and strict for 2nd++ offense..

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • Yes, jailtime.

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • Yah, first fine, then jail, mild jail time.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Hmm.. Perhaps..

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No..

    Votes: 57 87.7%

  • Something else(explain).

    Votes: 4 6.2%
  • Total voters
    65
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jerry said:
You asked a question?

My bad.

Idk, I'm open to the idea and would like to see an answer to that myself.

What happens when both parents are caught in any other jailable offence?
Click to expand...

Usually jailable offenses have a victim. That's why adultery shouldn't be jailable. :mrgreen:
 
Radical Ron said:
If anything the adultery trial would victimize people far worse than the actual act of adultery.
Click to expand...

We should jail people who participate in adultery trials. :mrgreen:
 
Jerry said:
The license itself doesn't state that you have next-of-kin status either.
Click to expand...

Again that is civil law, not criminal.

Jerry said:
My diver's license, the license itself, doesn't say what side of the road I have to drive on either.
Click to expand...

It does not have to as it is a separate law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Before you are given a license to drive you must go through training and become familiar with the laws of the road.

This cannot be said for marriage.

Jerry said:
When you look at the regulation on the license, you see all the various rules thereof.

My point here is to direct you away from looking only to the actual license, and to open yourself up to the existing regulation of that license to get an accurate view.
Click to expand...

It does not apply to a marriage license as I have shown above.

Marriage is again a civil contract and covered under civil law, period. The drivers license and breaches of that license are criminal and can be civil if physical damage is involved.

Jerry said:
That's a whole other thread all by itself.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Jerry said:
I didn't go there.

They are both licenses and that is why my analogy applies.

I didn't argue that they were both rights. If you want to use only licenses for things which are rights then I can bring in my CCW and make the same argument. If you really need me to waste a post doing so then please let me know.
Click to expand...

The state can take away, manage and otherwise put any restrictions on something that is a privilege like drivers licenses. The state cannot do that to rights. Now they do reserve the right to take rights away in the case of criminal felony's and military service.

So I am asking do you want to make marriage a privilege? Rather than a inalienable right?
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Usually jailable offenses have a victim.
Click to expand...

Spouse, children, and any applicable public assistance.

There I just listed 3 victims off the top of my head.

...and that's not including any children born from adultery....or any public assistance a 3rd party mother would need to take care of that child...

There's 5 victimizations from a single act of adultery, of which the state is hit twice.

independent_thinker2002 said:
That's why adultery shouldn't be jailable. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Well, now according to your logic adultery should be a jailable offence.
 
Jerry said:
Spouse, children, and any applicable public assistance.

There I just listed 3 victims off the top of my head.

...and that's not including any children born from adultery....or any public assistance a 3rd party mother would need to take care of that child...

There's 5 victimizations from a single act of adultery, of which the state is hit twice.



Well, now according to your logic adultery should be a jailable offence.
Click to expand...

The children don't need to know. The spouse doesn't always find out.
If I can get money I'll let my wife cheat on me tonight. :mrgreen:

Adultery is just a lie. Everyone lies. It doesn't cost you anything. You don't have to break up a family over adultery.
 
Blackdog said:
Again that is civil law, not criminal.
Click to expand...

You are off point.

Jerry said:
Blackdog said:
I know I am coming into this late but a marriage license does not state anyplace if you have sex with someone else it breaches the contract. Now adultery is acceptable terms for divorce, but it is a civil matter, not criminal. This is how it should be.
Click to expand...
The license itself doesn't state that you have next-of-kin status either.

My driver’s license, the license itself, doesn't say what side of the road I have to drive on either.
Click to expand...

You were basing your argument off of the text of the single piece of paper: the literal, physical license itself. You were excluding in toto all the regulation on marriage, none of which is codified on the single piece of paper you based your argument on.

My point was to show that rules not literally, physically listed on the actual license itself still apply.

Nothing in my rebuttal to that point has anything to do, whatsoever, with what kind of law we are speaking of.

Blackdog said:
It does not have to as it is a separate law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what this comment is supposed to pertain to.

Blackdog said:
Before you are given a license to drive you must go through training and become familiar with the laws of the road.

This cannot be said for marriage.
Click to expand...

Again, this does not negate the fact that rules exist which are not listed on the single piece of paper composing the license itself.

Blackdog said:
Marriage is again a civil contract and covered under civil law, period. The drivers license and breaches of that license are criminal and can be civil if physical damage is involved.
Click to expand...

We know what is.

We are discussing if it should become something else.

Blackdog said:
The state can take away, manage and otherwise put any restrictions on something that is a privilege like drivers licenses. The state cannot do that to rights. Now they do reserve the right to take rights away in the case of criminal felony's and military service.
Click to expand...

The state takes away the right to keep and carry when you commit a felony, so I know that your argument here is false.

Blackdog said:
So I am asking do you want to make marriage a privilege? Rather than a inalienable right?
Click to expand...

I do not support making adultery a criminal offence.

I'm open to the possibility and am exploring it.

The questions I have quoted from your post here do not serve that end, so I choose to ignore them.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
The children don't need to know. The spouse doesn't always find out.
If I can get money I'll let my wife cheat on me tonight. :mrgreen:

Adultery is just a lie. Everyone lies. It doesn't cost you anything. You don't have to break up a family over adultery.
Click to expand...

There I go assuming everyone is keeping up with context again :lol: Silly me :doh

Well if no one ever finds out then I guess we don't have anything to discuss, at all, on this thread. I mean, if no one finds out then how is it even a Civil matter?
 
Jerry said:
Spouse,
Click to expand...
yes, their feelings are hurt. That's not a jailable offense last time I checked. Its a civil matter.

children,
Click to expand...
this has already been covered. Adultery doesn't cause the problems for kids, neglect does. If your spouse cheats you are not obligated to neglect your kids.

and any applicable public assistance.
Click to expand...
how so? Once again, adultery doesn't require divorce. Its divorce that would cause damage to this "public assistance" if such damages even exist, which I don't believe it does because

1) you don't sign an agreement with the gov't explicitly defining such damages

2) Benefits are revoked upon divorce.

...and that's not including any children born from adultery...
Click to expand...
what about them? Sounds like a civil matter once again. Its no different than unmarried couple having a child. For some reason you are obsessed with the belief that having a ceremony and signing a piece of paper automatically makes one have better kids. This is an abstraction from the real problem: that kids require parental attention and guidance. Such doesn't magically appear just because you are unmarried or married because marriage does not enforce such behavior. The reason why kids suffer more in broken homes has nothing to do with whether the parents signed a piece of paper or had a marriage ceremony so such an illogical conclusion is a petty attempt to use fallacious reasoning that correlation equals causation for neglect of children.
 
Tucker Case said:
What if the DA decides to go ahead with the charges anyway?
Click to expand...

Well, that would be the beauty of progressive laws. Giving the rights of the offended party to press charges, but no the state.

You think about this completely incorrect. Adultery as illegal should only give the right of the offended party to press charges against the adulterer, and with satisfactory evidence and trial have that person punished with jail time.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
Well, that would be the beauty of progressive laws. Giving the rights of the offended party to press charges, but no the state.
Click to expand...
well such "progressive laws" don't exist here. Sorry. Only the DA may press criminal charges.

You think about this completely incorrect. Adultery as illegal should only give the right of the offended party to press charges against the adulterer, and with satisfactory evidence and trial have that person punished with jail time.
Click to expand...
as I understand it citizens cannot press charges. They can have it noted that the victim would like charges pressed but I believe the DA gets to decide whether evidence is substantial enough to press charges.
 
scourge99 said:
yes, their feelings are hurt. That's not a jailable offense last time I checked. Its a civil matter.
Click to expand...

IT said there were NO victims. None at all.

"Spouse" is an example of a victim. It can be only a Civil matter AND the spouse be a victim.

I'm not sure how my post could have been interpreted to mean anything else.

scourge99 said:
this has already been covered. Adultery doesn't cause the problems for kids, neglect does. If your spouse cheats you are not obligated to neglect your kids.

how so? Once again, adultery doesn't require divorce. Its divorce that would cause damage to this "public assistance" if such damages even exist, which I don't believe it does because

1) you don't sign an agreement with the gov't explicitly defining such damages

2) Benefits are revoked upon divorce.

what about them? Sounds like a civil matter once again. Its no different than unmarried couple having a child. For some reason you are obsessed with the belief that having a ceremony and signing a piece of paper automatically makes one have better kids. This is an abstraction from the real problem: that kids require parental attention and guidance. Such doesn't magically appear just because you are unmarried or married because marriage does not enforce such behavior. The reason why kids suffer more in broken homes has nothing to do with whether the parents signed a piece of paper or had a marriage ceremony so such an illogical conclusion is a petty attempt to use fallacious reasoning that correlation equals causation for neglect of children.
Click to expand...

I can see i need to create a well sourced "Standard Issue Response" for this.

I was hoping we were at the conversational level where we all already understood the general harm brought to families suffering from adultery.

I was wrong in my assumption and I apologize for that. No doubt my posts appeared to have a level of arrogance as a result.

This evening I will take the time to create a package where one can see credible data on the results of adultery.
 
Jerry said:
IT said there were NO victims. None at all."Spouse" is an example of a victim. It can be only a Civil matter AND the spouse be a victim.
Click to expand...
I don't care to get in a definition debate or a semantic debate. Being emotionally hurt is not grounds for criminal charges under the law. Enough said.

I'm not sure how my post could have been interpreted to mean anything else.
Click to expand...
I wasn't terying to imply it said anything else. All I did was show that being a "victim" of adultery is no different than being a "victim" of verbal abuse. We don't punish criminally for mental abuse, period.

I can see i need to create a well sourced "Standard Issue Response" for this.

I was hoping we were at the conversational level where we all already understood the general harm brought to families suffering from adultery.

I was wrong in my assumption and I apologize for that. No doubt my posts appeared to have a level of arrogance as a result.

This evening I will take the time to create a package where one can see credible data on the results of adultery.
Click to expand...

If you do can you try to include the original white paper as sources. Sites or news articles that paraphrase such work are notorious for drawing incorrect conclusions or spinning the results. I know it makes it more difficult but try to see if you can. Thanks in advance.
 
Radical Ron said:
I thought the arguement was if it should be criminal not civil.
Click to expand...

Just for accuricy: It would still be Civil if it were Criminal. It's not either/or.

You were interjecting a tangent on jailing people involved with lawsuits, and to that my opinion is no. Lawsuits have immunity.

I don't think anyone is arguing that divorce should not be Civil.

Radical Ron said:
Jailtime as opposed to penalties, but I don't support penalties either.
Click to expand...

Civil "penalties" include alimony, child support, liquidation of shared assets, claims on the former spouse’s Social Security and/or pension/401K/etc....

These are thing which would have been shared if the marriage stayed intact, they are things which the spouse was legally entitled to and counted on being there. Their life was structured accordingly and the spouse is now in danger of losing as the other spouse is no longer complying with the terms of the license.

That's a demonstratable damage to the spouse, one they can sue (divorce) to guarantee access to.
 
Last edited:
scourge99 said:
well such "progressive laws" don't exist here. Sorry. Only the DA may press criminal charges.
Click to expand...

I dont think that is right.

scourge99 said:
as I understand it citizens cannot press charges. They can have it noted that the victim would like charges pressed but I believe the DA gets to decide whether evidence is substantial enough to press charges.
Click to expand...

Of course citizens can press charges.. What about domestic violence cases for example, the majority that press charges in such cases is the victim, not the DA? But of course the DA have to decide if the evidence is good enough to go to trial, thats how it should be like in a case of adultery as well.
 
scourge99 said:
I don't care to get in a definition debate or a semantic debate. Being emotionally hurt is not grounds for criminal charges under the law. Enough said.

I wasn't terying to imply it said anything else. All I did was show that being a "victim" of adultery is no different than being a "victim" of verbal abuse. We don't punish criminally for mental abuse, period.
Click to expand...

See I just don't see it as punishing my spouse for hurting my widdle feewins.

The vows are the "Full Faith and Credit" portion required of any contract.
To brake the vows is to violate the faith and credit placed in you that you will keep your part of the deal.

If you can't trust a person to keep their end of the deal you wouldn't enter into the agreement with them to begin with. In this case, you are already in an agreement when you find that they are not trustworthy.

To then divorce the person is to secure your assets and interests you don't want anyone you can't trust to have access to.

As I read it, the question posed in this thread is simply 'does violating privileged access to other people's assets rise to the level of Criminal behavior'?

You're typical "no-fault" or "uncontested" divorce may not, especially where there is no community property; but maybe at a certain dollar value of a contested divorce it does.

Maybe the state doesn't want to float the bill for various assistances to support children of a divorce, and may have grounds to go after the party who violated the marriage license to recover that money.

Maybe at some point the state feels that it needs to impose a jail sentence to compel that money, or simply to get a hold of a person and place them in a work program so that there are wages to garnish.
 
Jerry said:
Just for accuricy: It would still be Civil if it were Criminal. It's not either/or.

You were interjecting a tangent on jailing people involved with lawsuits, and to that my opinion is no. Lawsuits have immunity.

I don't think anyone is arguing that divorce should not be Civil.



Civil "penalties" include alimony, child support, liquidation of shared assets, claims on the former spouse’s Social Security and/or pension/401K/etc....

These are thing which would have been shared if the marriage stayed intact, they are things which the spouse was legally entitled to and counted on being there. Their life was structured accordingly and the spouse is now in danger of losing as the other spouse is no longer complying with the terms of the license.

That's a demonstratable damage to the spouse, one they can sue (divorce) to guarantee access to.
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean. But to be clear, I feel that the laws are flawed in their current state. And to add an amendment to the law making adultery a jailable offense in a divorce trial seems barbaric and twisted to me. In my opinion we live in a society where "family law" is still subject to a court system that favors women over men.
 
[sarcasm] Of course! I mean, let’s get the state involved in all items, like jail time for people who tell a lie, big or small and people who cheat at board-games and people who curse. [/sarcasm]
 
peepnklown said:
[sarcasm] Of course! I mean, let’s get the state involved in all items, like jail time for people who tell a lie, big or small and people who cheat at board-games and people who curse. [/sarcasm]
Click to expand...

****! How the hell am I ever gonna win at Monopoly now! This is ****in' bull****!

Oh... uh... I don't cheat at board games.
 
Sure, that's a good way to fill up all those empty jail cells. While we're at it, let's jail people who smurf multiplayer games.
 
peepnklown said:
[sarcasm] Of course! I mean, let’s get the state involved in all items, like jail time for people who tell a lie, big or small and people who cheat at board-games and people who curse. [/sarcasm]
Click to expand...

The state is already involved in marriage. Since we allow them to define who can and can't be married why is it a stretch that they criminalize part right of it.
 
Phoenix said:
The state is already involved in marriage. Since we allow them to define who can and can't be married why is it a stretch that they criminalize part right of it.
Click to expand...
You are really asking why it is a stretch for adultery to be made a punishable criminal offense? :shock:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom