Is infidelity wrong?

[mortalterror]

Only for women.

[Virgil]

A quote for you:

"Character is who you are when no one's looking"

Whether or not your significant other is aware of the cheating situation, it shows a lack of character to participate. By that premise, your character is undertaking something that is morally bankrupt and "cheating" by definition shows a clear disrespect for one you supposedly hold dear.

Thank you Wolfman, I was looking for just such a quote when I was responding, but couldn't come up with one.

I'd have to agree, though I am unsure how I stand on morals, I tend to run my life by what is considered proper etiquette and manner, and, on those grounds, infidelity is certainly ill mannered.

Do onto others as one would have done onto oneself. The universal core moral. Nice to see we agree.

[DWolfman]

Which is why I think it's still morally irresponsible but in this hypothetical scenario (where the 'victim' will never find out), I don't think it is immoral. Just disrespectful.

From Dictionary.com:

IMMORAL
–adjective 1. violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics.
2. licentious or lascivious.

I don't think the above definition splits hairs as to whether the victim finds out or not. Violating a trust and commitment, whether discovered or not, is contrary to moral standards.

Just because you don't get caught stealing from someone doesn't make it less than a crime, just unpunished.

[JBI]

Thank you Wolfman, I was looking for just such a quote when I was responding, but couldn't come up with one.


Do onto others as one would have done onto oneself. The universal core moral. Nice to see we agree.

That isn't the universal code, that's the Christian code. Confucius, for instance, would have it as "don't do unto others as you wouldn't do unto yourself," I tend to think he is closer.

As it is though, I told you, I don't function on right/wrong or good/bad, more on well-mannered/rude.

[OrphanPip]

Besides the fact that you are violating what is considered by most to be a sacred contract. You would be exposing your spouse to increased risk of disease without her/his knowledge.

There is more to harm than awareness, someone can certainly be harmed even if they are not aware. If someone is in a coma, that they could wake up from, do you have the right to break their fingers and steal from them because they aren't aware of it? Most of us I hope would consider torturing an unconscious individual wrong.

[Dark Muse]

Besides the fact that you are violating what is considered by most to be a sacred contract. You would be exposing your spouse to increased risk of disease without her/his knowledge.

Excellent Point!

There is also the case of children, even if those involved are using protection, that is not an absolute guarantee, supposing one of the parties involved within the affair were to become pregnant, the children would undoubtedly be harmed in what would follow in debating over what would become of their future, and the very way in which they were conceived could lead to resentment of them.

[billl]

If you kill someone, you deprive them of all future possibility for happiness or pleasure. If you rape someone, you cause them to suffer, even if no one ever knows it was you. These things are immoral regardless of whether or not you get caught because they either cause disress or deprive someone of happiness, cheating does neither.

Should a person be comfortable with the idea that a stalker or a peeping-tom might be watching them, without any fear of capture? What would it be like to meet such a voyeur, and learn of their "hobby?" Is it right to say that the person is behaving morally, as long as they go undiscovered?

Anyhow, I think that a cheater in a committed relationship would be dealing with their loved one in a manner that was no longer sincere, basically treating them as a child that should think that Santa exists, or that the family dog is still alive, on some relative's farm. To achieve such a superiority in the access to and manipulation of information especially for the purpose of deceiving a loved one, violating the trust of an equal and respected partner in life seems morally wrong. If we are committed to accuracy in textbooks, then it seems that a similar respect to those closest to us should be considered better than deception.

[Buh4Bee]

From what we have learned from moral science and from our elders I think infidelity is spiteful.

I believe infidelity can be spiteful. As mentioned before, infidelity can be used a way to move out of a bad relationship or get even. A very spiteful and disrepectful thing to do.

[African_Love]

It seems to me that by the very fact that it is not morally wrong only under the circumstances that another person does not discover it, is in itself proof of the immorality of it.

If an act is a moral act, than it should not rely upon secrecy to make it so.

And by saying that infidelity is not immoral, is by default saying it is in fact a moral thing to do, and by definition if an act is moral than it is just and right.

If you conclude infidelity is not immoral, than it is just, and right to be unfaithful.

For you cannot say that it is neither immoral nor moral, it must be one or the other.

Taking a walk is a morally neutral act. Let's say that your best friend is dying and before your friend dies, he asks you to scatter his ashes all over your garden. To promise to do this and not pull through (and it wouldn't be very difficult or inconvenient to do so) would be disrespectful to the memory of your friend but it would not be harmful, he died believing that his request would be granted, not granting or granting his request can neither harm nor benefit him. Again, I think our capacity for abstract thinking gives us an intuitively metaphysical view of the universe and I'm looking at this from a strictly materialist standpoint. We can talk about preferences, vows, contracts etc. but these are abstractions that exist in the privacy of our own 'minds', not in the external world. Not spreading your friend's ashes over your garden is disrespectful to the memory of your friend, yes, but that memory exists in your brain, it is a figment of your imagination and there is nothing you could do to harm or benefit your actual friend anymore.

Besides the fact that you are violating what is considered by most to be a sacred contract. You would be exposing your spouse to increased risk of disease without her/his knowledge.

In this scenario, you are either using a condom and/or the person you are having an affair with can provide you with medical documentation of being std-free.

There is more to harm than awareness, someone can certainly be harmed even if they are not aware. If someone is in a coma, that they could wake up from, do you have the right to break their fingers and steal from them because they aren't aware of it? Most of us I hope would consider torturing an unconscious individual wrong.

This is nonsensical to me, I really do not understand how someone can be harmed by an act if that act does not cause them to consciously experience distress (even if someone doesn't know that their food was poisoned, they would still suffer as a result). Besides (directly or indirectly) causing someone to consciously experience distress, the only other way you can wrong someone is to deprive them of benefit. If someone is in a coma that they will wake up from then breaking their fingers will cause them to suffer and stealing from them will deprive them of benefit, 'succesful' infidelity does not cause suffering or deprive one's partner of benefit.

We generally agree that killing humans is morally wrong and killing plants is not. My reasoning for this is simple. Humans have a conscious desire to experience pleasure or happiness and we are capable of suffering, plants have no similar desires that can be frustrated or satisfied and nothing we could do can harm them. Thus, it's meaningless to talk about harm or benefit outside of the conscious experience of distress or pleasure, what exists to you is what you consciously experience. I definitely agree that cheating is disrespectful and I would break up with a woman if I found out she was cheating on me but I cannot consider it to be unethical based on my moral framework.

[Stargazer86]

Advanced apology for disjointed post:

I understand morals vary from culture to culture, but there are certain broad ideas that can be accepted and agreed upon by most.

This is like saying "if a tree falls in the forest, but no one was around to hear it, did it really make a sound?"

I have a friend who has been married to her husband for a number of years (around 10 or so, I believe). She found out that not only had he cheated on her, but he has a 4 year old child with this woman (who is one of many with whom he's cheated on his very loyal wife). For some reason she chose to stay with him for a while after that, and encouraged him to see the child and to pay support to the the mother for the child (I'm telling you, this woman has a heart of gold). Anyway, the point being, her lack of awareness of his rampant infidelity didn't make it "moral" or "okay" on his part. It was wrong, immoral, and disrespectful no matter how you cut it, regardless of the fact that she didn't find this out until later.

Now if someone has an "open relationship" or if they're swingers...well that is thier own perrogative and I could see the "morals" on that being a little more subjective.
Disclaimer: not saying that I would do that or personally condone it, but I know people who have done this and I don't judge them or think of them as "immoral" as long as they are open with thier partners and safe. Still though...

[DWolfman]

I would break up with a woman if I found out she was cheating on me but I cannot consider it to be unethical based on my moral framework.

Let's see, one with his own personal moral framework????

How about:

SOCIOPATH
Someone whose social behavior is extremely abnormal. Sociopaths are interested only in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behavior on others.
-The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition


...
Edited because after re-reading my post,
I felt it may be construed as an attack.
I merely wish to counter the original position
of the poster saying infidelity is disrespectful
but not immoral.

[Emil Miller]

In general terms I think that women are more likely to feel let down by infidelity on the part of their husband or boyfriend but in their heart of hearts they know that boys will usually be boys.

[rimbaud]

In general terms I think that women are more likely to feel let down by infidelity on the part of their husband or boyfriend but in their heart of hearts they know that boys will usually be boys.

I think that anyone might feel let down by the infidelity of the partner. I've seen cases where the guy felt let down and insecure by his girlfriend's infidelity
he said that "I, a guy could restrain myself and she a girl could not" so it seems to me that just because the fact that women "know" in their heart that boys will be boys feel a little less hurt by infidelity than men.

well that's just one example, depends on the person, but if we are talking groups, my opinion would be that guys tend to get more hurt when being cheated on.

[LitNetIsGreat]

An interesting post I think.

There is a conflict between biology and morality going on here. On the one side nature is telling you to do one thing and the social ideology is telling you to do another. However faithful one person is to another, which is a loving and good thing, there is always, to some degree a biological pull in another direction, with the chance of other possibilities.

I'm not siding with either position, I'm just saying that biology is a factor that cannot be ignored.

[African_Love]

An interesting post I think.

There is a conflict between biology and morality going on here. On the one side nature is telling you to do one thing and the social ideology is telling you to do another. However faithful one person is to another, which is a loving and good thing, there is always, to some degree a biological pull in another direction, with the chance of other possibilities.

I'm not siding with either position, I'm just saying that biology is a factor that cannot be ignored.

Human 'nature' is a myth, imo. Everything we do is 'natural' since we are apart of nature. As biological organisms, biology is always a 'factor'.

Let's see, one with his own personal moral framework????

How about:

SOCIOPATH
Someone whose social behavior is extremely abnormal. Sociopaths are interested only in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behavior on others.
-The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition


...
Edited because after re-reading my post,
I felt it may be construed as an attack.
I merely wish to counter the original position
of the poster saying infidelity is disrespectful
but not immoral.

Everyone has a different perspective on what constitutes ethically sound behavior so I don't know why you're singling me out. I do think cheating is disrespectful so it's not like I'm saying "anything goes". I don't want a woman to cheat on me, I would likely break up with her if I found out that she was. I doubt I'd ever be in this position as I would let my hypothetical partner know that I'm fine with her having sex or romantic relationships with other men if it would make her happy.

I don't see how someone is a sociopath for cheating. If their partner never finds out then their behavior has no negative effect on them.