Adultery bans after Dobbs?

WolfBear

Well-known member
How do you think that SCOTUS would decide the constitutionality of adultery bans if this question will ever come before them in the future? Especially if Dobbs will still stand while SCOTUS's various other due process privacy precedents such as Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell will likewise still stand. Let's say that some conservative US state will actually be bold enough to arrest someone for adultery, with this person suing this US state all of the way up to the US Supreme Court. What happens next?

There's been a legal article that states that adultery bans' constitutionality is unsustainable after Lawrence:


But then again, Lawrence is in some tension with Dobbs. So, what do you think?
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
One thing worth distinguishing is that there are two types of adultery: Adultery that occurs with the consent of one's spouse and adultery that occurs without the consent of one's spouse. Polyamorous relationships and polyamorous marriages do exist, aftr all. Even if one believes that the latter should be criminalized, is it really fair to criminalize the former as well? What about "my body, my choice"? Especially considering that no one is ever actually being harmed by this.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
One thing worth distinguishing is that there are two types of adultery: Adultery that occurs with the consent of one's spouse and adultery that occurs without the consent of one's spouse. Polyamorous relationships and polyamorous marriages do exist, aftr all. Even if one believes that the latter should be criminalized, is it really fair to criminalize the former as well? What about "my body, my choice"? Especially considering that no one is ever actually being harmed by this.

Except any children, the other spouse likely over time and, as a result, society at large. The former may be less egregious, but it is no less wrong and should be criminalized too. We have varying degrees of punishment for murder, so no reason this should be as well.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Except any children, the other spouse likely over time and, as a result, society at large. The former may be less egregious, but it is no less wrong and should be criminalized too. We have varying degrees of punishment for murder, so no reason this should be as well.

Those aren't harmed if the adultery is done with the consent of one's spouse.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
Except any children, the other spouse likely over time and, as a result, society at large. The former may be less egregious, but it is no less wrong and should be criminalized too. We have varying degrees of punishment for murder, so no reason this should be as well.
What does murder have to do with this case? Like at all? The difference between murder and polygamy is freaking huge, including the major difference: consent.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
What does murder have to do with this case? Like at all? The difference between murder and polygamy is freaking huge, including the major difference: consent.

You could, for one, attempt to read the post as written instead of attaching to it your own meaning. Let's recall what I said:

The former may be less egregious, but it is no less wrong and should be criminalized too. We have varying degrees of punishment for murder, so no reason this should be as well.​

For example, accidentally kill someone while driving? Vehicular manslaughter. Pre-mediated murder of a co-worker? First degree murder. I was clearly talking about the differing punishments and categories we have for murder being applied in the case of adultery.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Source, please?

Here you go:

Steve Brody, Ph.D., a psychologist in Cambria, California, explains that less than 1 percent of married people are in open marriages. Some research suggests that open marriage has a 92 percent failure rate.” (3) So not only do very few people engage in open/polyamorous marriages, 92% of those marriages fail. That’s double the current divorce rate for monogamous, heterosexual marriages.
So, the very alternative to monogamy actually creates a guaranteed failure. After all, if someone came up to you and said: “Hey, I just found this awesome stock and I believe it will make you a millionaire overnight. But, the only downside is, there is a 92% chance of failure based on past performance. And you could lose all your money. But, don’t worry about that – Are you in?” Anyone who has two brain cells to rub together is going to walk the other way and realize such a proposal is crazy, that is if they want to secure their financial future. These are odds anyone in their right mind will not take. To that end, how can polyamory be a solution to the failure of marriages when polyamory pretty much guarantees a fail? Where is the success in that?​
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Here you go:

Steve Brody, Ph.D., a psychologist in Cambria, California, explains that less than 1 percent of married people are in open marriages. Some research suggests that open marriage has a 92 percent failure rate.” (3) So not only do very few people engage in open/polyamorous marriages, 92% of those marriages fail. That’s double the current divorce rate for monogamous, heterosexual marriages.
So, the very alternative to monogamy actually creates a guaranteed failure. After all, if someone came up to you and said: “Hey, I just found this awesome stock and I believe it will make you a millionaire overnight. But, the only downside is, there is a 92% chance of failure based on past performance. And you could lose all your money. But, don’t worry about that – Are you in?” Anyone who has two brain cells to rub together is going to walk the other way and realize such a proposal is crazy, that is if they want to secure their financial future. These are odds anyone in their right mind will not take. To that end, how can polyamory be a solution to the failure of marriages when polyamory pretty much guarantees a fail? Where is the success in that?​

I don't see any link to the actual study itself for this, so I don't know if it's actually a reliable study.

Here the data is more mixed:

 

History Learner

Well-known member
I don't see any link to the actual study itself for this, so I don't know if it's actually a reliable study.

Here the data is more mixed:


Beyond the numerous problems of using wikipedia as a source, that's a very skewed reading to take of what even that says:

Some couples report that open marriage contributed to their divorces. Janus and Janus asked divorced people to list the one primary reason for their divorces.[52] Approximately 1 percent of men and 2 percent of women listed open marriage as the primary reason for their divorce. This seems like a small percentage, but keep in mind that only 1 to 6 percent of the population have open marriages.[27][53][54][55] Open marriage is perceived as a primary cause of divorce in a substantial minority of the 1 to 6 percent of people who have open marriages.​
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
You could, for one, attempt to read the post as written instead of attaching to it your own meaning. Let's recall what I said:

The former may be less egregious, but it is no less wrong and should be criminalized too. We have varying degrees of punishment for murder, so no reason this should be as well.​

For example, accidentally kill someone while driving? Vehicular manslaughter. Pre-mediated murder of a co-worker? First degree murder. I was clearly talking about the differing punishments and categories we have for murder being applied in the case of adultery.
.... I did read, and it didn't help. You first said that one was no less wrong than the other, which a) isn't the case when it comes to murder law, and isn't the case here. Second, saying it's the government's business to butt in on people's private lives to regulate what they do with full knowledge and support of there spouse is a horrible idea.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
ditto. this kind of thing seems to be just a few steps away from a national religion. To those that say "Yes, Christianity should be our national religion" Which one? Baptist? Pentecostal? catholic? Morman? good luck sorting that crap out.

Or, you know, Ecumenicalism; all major Christian denominations share the same opinion on subjects like this. Beyond that, of course, we can solve the whole problem by balkanizing the United States as a whole. South is overwhelmingly Protestant, for example, so that's easy. Utah and much of the Inner West is Mormon, so that's solved. On you go, but if it doesn't work for any of the successor states, no longer my problem because its fixed in my nation. We'll just take their territory when they inevitably collapse.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
.... I did read, and it didn't help. You first said that one was no less wrong than the other, which a) isn't the case when it comes to murder law, and isn't the case here.

It's really not that complicated; Murder is wrong as a general rule, same for Adultery. We do as a society, however, recognize differences in the carrying out of this moral wrong. As I said earlier, we still enact punishment of people for accidental murder the same as we do intentional, but we do vary the level of punishment in accordance to what happened.

Jim Bob kills his co-worker with a stapler after plotting it for weeks? That's first degree, 25 years.

Suzy hit a grandmother because she was texted and driving? 5 to 10.

Both committed a wrong, but it is the intent that matters. Same should be for adultery.

Second, saying it's the government's business to butt in on people's private lives to regulate what they do with full knowledge and support of there spouse is a horrible idea.

Cool, didn't ask and don't care.
 
It's really not that complicated; Murder is wrong as a general rule, same for Adultery. We do as a society, however, recognize differences in the carrying out of this moral wrong. As I said earlier, we still enact punishment of people for accidental murder the same as we do intentional, but we do vary the level of punishment in accordance to what happened.

Jim Bob kills his co-worker with a stapler after plotting it for weeks? That's first degree, 25 years.

Suzy hit a grandmother because she was texted and driving? 5 to 10.

Both committed a wrong, but it is the intent that matters. Same should be for adultery.



Cool, didn't ask and don't care.

great so now we go back to the days where it's only a sin if you get caught. let's completely forget all the other times outlawing sin has utterly failed THIS TIME it'll be different.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
*Looks at just about every big city in the country* Wait we haven't yet? I thought killing was only wrong if a conservative does it.

Which is case in point of the flaws in your logic; every crime is only illegal if you get caught. Our DAs and criminal justice system have loosened up since 2020, and as a result crime has skyrocketed. Same concept for penalizing adultery/swinging/whatever fruitcase term of the week.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top