• 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 women be allowed custody? [W:124]

Should cheating ex-wives be allowed to contest custody?

  • Yes, custody is ex-wives' right, unconditionally.

    Votes: 7 14.9%
  • No, by cheating, they reduced their rights, husband needs upper hand.

    Votes: 12 25.5%
  • Other.

    Votes: 28 59.6%

  • Total voters
    47
They can when you take things like this in to account, especially if it is a daughter, and not a son;

Another Cause of Early Puberty in Girls: Absent Dads | TIME.com

I don't doubt that, but it still isn't addressing the point that I made. I firmly believe that children need both parents, and that they do much better in a family setting with parents who love each other and work as a team to raise their children. What I am saying is that a woman (or man) who cheats is not a bad parent, but is a bad partner.
 
Should women be allowed custody of their children after they cheat on their husband, resulting in a divorce, where the husband demands full custody?

There are many things that go into making a decision as to who best to have custody of children. The act of cheating alone shouldn't have anything to do with it at all, in my opinion.
 
Should women be allowed custody?

How does a parent cheat on their spouse without giving up time that should have been spent with the children?
 
There are many things that go into making a decision as to who best to have custody of children. The act of cheating alone shouldn't have anything to do with it at all, in my opinion.

I agree, solely because of the moral nature of the argument. Although I highly value moral behaviors, as a basis for maintaining a strong society, when morality enters civil law, the same people who support it in this case, will also writhe in pain if morality is brought into other civil law issues, and accuse Christians who don't support gay marriage of being the American Taliban.
 
I don't doubt that, but it still isn't addressing the point that I made. I firmly believe that children need both parents, and that they do much better in a family setting with parents who love each other and work as a team to raise their children. What I am saying is that a woman (or man) who cheats is not a bad parent, but is a bad partner.

I agree, but I believe it is an emotional divergence from the question originally posed, which was if a woman cheated, should she lose custodial rights. I am assuming the question is being proposed in a custody battle, courts scenario.
 
I agree, but I believe it is an emotional divergence from the question originally posed, which was if a woman cheated, should she lose custodial rights. I am assuming the question is being proposed in a custody battle, courts scenario.

I assume the same, which is what my initial response was based on. I don't view the maternal-child relationship as equivalent to the husband-wife relationship, thus I don't think it should be taken into consideration, but I also don't think the woman automatically should have custody just because she is a woman.
 
I assume the same, which is what my initial response was based on. I don't view the maternal-child relationship as equivalent to the husband-wife relationship, thus I don't think it should be taken into consideration, but I also don't think the woman automatically should have custody just because she is a woman.

But when you take into account the mountains of evidence showing negative outcomes for children from single-parent homes, it doesn't make sense to even equate that a cheater could be a good parent, considering they have risked that child's well being and livelihood for a potentially once-only encounter. I think what Aberration said is salient to this discussion also, which was;

How does a parent cheat on their spouse without giving up time that should have been spent with the children?

So what it boils down to, is that in reality, cheaters loves their children, but make ****ty parents.

Love doesn't equate to good parenting. Just love. Many crack addicts love their children, just not enough to care for them over their own addiction.

NOTE: My wife was molested by one of my MIL's boyfriends, and not even by one of her many husbands, of which she is on her 5th. My wife, for most of her life, was not raised by her biological father, but by somebody else, who was, in fact, a good father. It was just her mom's trial and error, and ****ty judgement prior, that got my wife molested.
 
Last edited:
How does a parent cheat on their spouse without giving up time that should have been spent with the children?

How do people cheat, period? . . . A lot of it is office related- at times when it's not neglecting spouse/children to do so.

I think the myth that someone runs off whenever they 'go to the store' or 'go to the drs' or 'going out with friends for sports night' as a guise for cheating is really more based on myth. . . reality is - most people don't do that when they cheat.

Infidelity Statistics - Truth About Deception

My ex was always wrapped up with his coworkers - together, he was suppose to be management . . . there you go. He wouldn't have been home even if he didn't cheat so it's not like it cut into our time together. Now his drug habit - that did.
 
But, isn't the husband and her child the same because it was her explicit choice to have both of them?

No. COMPLETELY different things.

Look, I love my wife. I'd die for her. But I can think of many things that would make me leave her, and infidelity is only one of them. If she became too naggy, or our interests started to diverge too much, or if we just got bored with each other. Such things can cause you to fall out of love in certain situations.

But there is nothing, NOTHING, that could cause me to stop loving my children. Paternal/maternal love is orders of magnitude greater/deeper than spousal love. I would venture to say many, if not most, parents feel that way. In fact, all too many people suffer through a miserable marriage solely out of the fear of losing their children.

You can't compare the two types of love.
 
How do people cheat, period? . . . A lot of it is office related- at times when it's not neglecting spouse/children to do so.

I think the myth that someone runs off whenever they 'go to the store' or 'go to the drs' or 'going out with friends for sports night' as a guise for cheating is really more based on myth. . . reality is - most people don't do that when they cheat.

Infidelity Statistics - Truth About Deception

My ex was always wrapped up with his coworkers - together, he was suppose to be management . . . there you go. He wouldn't have been home even if he didn't cheat so it's not like it cut into our time together. Now his drug habit - that did.

Job = Income, Income that is going to the family. F*cking around with somebody else while at work risks both income, and family. That doesn't really show any additional reason for allowing a cheater to keep a child. I can only see one reason for a cheater to keep the child, and that would be that the one not cheating is seriously f*ed up. Usually in those cases, the person that is that screwed up shouldn't be in the picture to begin with, if the cheater gave two flying f*cks about the kids to begin with.
 
Job = Income, Income that is going to the family. F*cking around with somebody else while at work risks both income, and family. That doesn't really show any additional reason for allowing a cheater to keep a child.

Ok . . . so tell me why the cheater - who did so wrong - should be given a free walk in the park and then pass the stress and issues of parenting all onto the other because they were "just that bad"

Don't you believe they should have to uphold their parental responsibilities - and not be given some sort of alleviation from parenting altogether?

No - to me it would be a personal hell to be without my kids. But it would also be extremely difficult to raise them without my husband doing something. I'd become more incensed and more angry if I was the only parent to carry the weight of all the decisions, issues and troubles when they were OUR children we made together. I'd not only expect him to be a parent - I'd demand it . . . he'd still go to events, games, parades, the dr's - all those things. He wouldn't be able to skip out of it all because he ****ed around.
 
No. COMPLETELY different things.

Look, I love my wife. I'd die for her. But I can think of many things that would make me leave her, and infidelity is only one of them. If she became too naggy, or our interests started to diverge too much, or if we just got bored with each other. Such things can cause you to fall out of love in certain situations.

But there is nothing, NOTHING, that could cause me to stop loving my children. Paternal/maternal love is orders of magnitude greater/deeper than spousal love. I would venture to say many, if not most, parents feel that way. In fact, all too many people suffer through a miserable marriage solely out of the fear of losing their children.

You can't compare the two types of love.


You would die for her, but you can think of many reasons why you would cheat on her? Your standard for sacrificing yourself is incredibly low, or at least it seems that way.
 
Ok . . . so tell me why the cheater - who did so wrong - should be given a free walk in the park and then pass the stress and issues of parenting all onto the other because they were "just that bad"

Don't you believe they should have to uphold their parental responsibilities - and not be given some sort of alleviation from parenting altogether?

No - to me it would be a personal hell to be without my kids. But it would also be extremely difficult to raise them without my husband doing something. I'd become more incensed and more angry if I was the only parent to carry the weight of all the decisions, issues and troubles when they were OUR children we made together. I'd not only expect him to be a parent - I'd demand it . . . he'd still go to events, games, parades, the dr's - all those things. He wouldn't be able to skip out of it all because he ****ed around.

Spiker, I already tore this same argument from you apart, yesterday;

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/142396-should-women-allowed-custody-7.html#post1061134243
 
You would die for her, but you can think of many reasons why you would cheat on her? Your standard for sacrificing yourself is incredibly low, or at least it seems that way.

I didn't say I would cheat on her. I said there were things that could make me leave her, i.e. get a divorce. One of those things that would make me leave her is infidelity on her part.

But I have known men and women who were horrible spouses and were cheaters but were outstanding parents. I have known copules that were faithful to each other but were mediocre parents at best. Humans are complicated creatures. You can't fit them into cookie cutter molds.
 

No - what it all boils down to is that you think cheating means they'er also a ****ty parent . . . and I don't think that's a determining factor.

OTHER factors make you ****ty - but cheating itself . . . no, especially when most of it goes unknown and doesn't end marriages.

Do you think a parent is ****ty if the marriage *doesn't end* (parent - not spouse - we've already established they're a bad spouse)
 
I didn't say I would cheat on her. I said there were things that could make me leave her, i.e. get a divorce. One of those things that would make me leave her is infidelity on her part.

But I have known men and women who were horrible spouses and were cheaters but were outstanding parents. I have known copules that were faithful to each other but were mediocre parents at best. Humans are complicated creatures. You can't fit them into cookie cutter molds.

This is true about humans, and i won't try and argue that.

I understood that you were saying you could think of many reasons why you would cheat on her. Was I wrong in that, or was that not what you had wrote?
 
Last edited:
No - what it all boils down to is that you think cheating means they'er also a ****ty parent . . . and I don't think that's a determining factor.

OTHER factors make you ****ty - but cheating itself . . . no, especially when most of it goes unknown and doesn't end marriages.

Do you think a parent is ****ty if the marriage *doesn't end* (parent - not spouse - we've already established they're a bad spouse)

Look, if you can't equate that cheating not only makes you a bad spouse, but considering the statistics, puts your child at risk to be less successful, prone to legal entanglements, as well as all other manners of life f*cked-up-edness, all because you risk putting them in a single parent situation, than why should I even bother responding?
 
Last edited:
Look, if you can't equate that cheating not only makes you a bad spouse, but considering the statistics, puts your child at risk to be less successful, prone to legal entanglements, as well as all other manners of life f*cked-up-edness, all because you put them in a single parent situation, than why should I even bother responding?

No - I'm not saying that it doesn't negative impact others if it leads to divorce.

What I am saying is that I don't believe it equates to whipping your child half to death and then throwing them in the closet.
Or burning them with cigarettes
Or locking them in a cage
Or handcuffing them to a bed
Or sexually abusing them
Or starving them
Or abandoning them on the side of the road

You think it does - I don't. You're pretending as if I'm writing it off as some sort of happy cake where everyones all happy and no one's hurt. . . which is tripe.
 
No - I'm not saying that it doesn't negative impact others if it leads to divorce.

What I am saying is that I don't believe it equates to whipping your child half to death and then throwing them in the closet.
Or burning them with cigarettes
Or locking them in a cage
Or handcuffing them to a bed
Or sexually abusing them
Or starving them
Or abandoning them on the side of the road

You think it does - I don't. You're pretending as if I'm writing it off as some sort of happy cake where everyones all happy and no one's hurt. . . which is tripe.

All I am saying is, so far you have only given a reason to keep the cheater around because you don't want to separate them from the parental responsibilities.
I have stated that they risked the child's future well-being already. Why would you want them around to do it again, other than to catch a break?
 
All I am saying is, so far you have only given a reason to keep the cheater around because you don't want to separate them from the parental responsibilities.
I have stated that they risked the child's future well-being already. Why would you want them around to do it again, other than to catch a break?

No - no - you're just ignoring everything else I've said in this thread and latching onto that one post because I just recently put it up.

Like I said in the beginning - it's circumstancial . . . other things would have to happen for it to be a consideration in my view. It's all circumstantial. Like many of us first stated - usually if someone cheats in a relationship there were other problems and the marriage was already rocky.

Cheating isn't what breaks up the marraige - it's how they decide to handle it that might end the marriage. Many couples facing the situation DON'T DIVORCE - that is also their response.

If cheating was the nail - then it would be the nail whether they stayed together or not. . . but it's not.

Marriages end for all sorts of reasons - does that mean that one parent should always lose rights if they were somehow considered more at fault for the breakdown of the marriage?

You're only looking at the worst-case scenarios and assuming that it always is like that - and it's not.
 
Last edited:
No - no - you're just ignoring everything else I've said in this thread and latching onto that one post because I just recently put it up.

Like I said in the beginning - it's circumstancial . . . other things would have to happen for it to be a consideration in my view. It's all circumstantial. Like many of us first stated - usually if someone cheats in a relationship there were other problems and the marriage was already rocky.

Cheating isn't what breaks up the marraige - it's how they decide to handle it that might end the marriage. Many couples facing the situation DON'T DIVORCE - that is also their response.

If cheating was the nail - then it would be the nail whether they stayed together or not. . . but it's not.

Marriages end for all sorts of reasons - does that mean that one parent should always lose rights if they were somehow considered more at fault for the breakdown of the marriage?

I want to mull over everything but the first sentence for a bit. This is much more substantial. Thank you.
 
Also consider that if someone does something wrong - no matter how bad it is - that doesn't mean they're always going to be like that and will just repeat the behavior over and over.

People can and do change - which is how my current marriage *didn't* fall apart years ago - we worked it out. I dont' think of my husband as any less of a parent and he doesn't think of me as any less of a parent even though we were separated for quite some time. Never in my life would I dream of taking our children away from him - even the boys from my first marriage.

We handled things without making the situation even worse for the kids - I believe that others can do the same *if they chose to make the effort*

Crappy decisions are made - it doesn't have to ruin everything.
Divorces happen - and it isn't' fun, but it doesn't have to completely obliterate any sort of goodness.

It's when the parents - divorce or stay together - turn into spiteful, hateful, ****ty people - and even take it out on the kids or fight al the time in front of the children . . . it's only when they can't handle it that things go ****hole.
 
Last edited:
The kids, regardless of the gender, ought to go to the parent who can do the best job parenting them, with no gender or fault bias.
 
What does sexual fidelity have to do with fitness to be a parent?
 
What does sexual fidelity have to do with fitness to be a parent?

'cause only ****ty parents cheat.

and only good parents stay faithful.

Causation and correlation.

(sarcasm is heavy with this one)
 
Back
Top Bottom