[TETENAL]

Adultery is going to be illegal with prison sentence in Turkey due to a planned law proposed by prime minister Erdogan. Reason for the new law is the "Holiness of the Family".

Is this an outrage according to your opinion?

[Zimphire]

That crap would work too. Jealous mistresses and wives getting even...

[f1000]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Is this an outrage according to your opinion?

Nope, I'm all for it.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by f1000:
Nope, I'm all for it.

Here's the article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3641026.stm

"If Turkey tries to include crimes that are not in other countries' laws in its penal code, European Union countries could interpret this as Islamic law entering Turkish law"

With this law Turkey would have lower chances to become a EU member.

[macvillage.net]

It's for them to decide.

All I know is statisically 50%+ of men admit to being unfaithful at some point in their marriage.

Quite a few breaking the law here, and there I'm sure.

[chris v]

Apparently, Turkey used to have a law like this, but it was struk down, because it was appplied almost exclusively to women.

I say, that's one small step backwards for a man, one giant leap backwards for mankind.

[Zimphire]

Yes because Adultery is so cool and hip and today.

[galarneau]

Well, the first question that comes to my mind is if divorce is legal in Turkey.

I mean, if your marriage goes to hell, and you can't get a divorce, and you can't have an affair, I think they'd see the "accident" rate go up significantly*


*Accident = cut brake lines, toaster in the bath, cyanide brownies, pianos falling from the sky, etc

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes because Adultery is so cool and hip and today.

Adultery is not cool, but there is absolutely no reason why the state should temper with personal relationships.

[Zimphire]

I would be against this if Adultery was just a victimless crime. But it is not.

There have been countless women that have gotten VD or worse from adulteress husbands. And vice versa.

But then I am all for free will.

I am torn here.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
There have been countless women that have gotten VD or worse from adulteress husbands.

But such laws are almost exclusively used against women. That's why women rights groups in Istambul are planning to protest the law.

But of course that suits you as well – to oppress women.

[forkies]

i'm surprised it isn't illegal in the usa, given the whole "sanctity of marriage" and all.....

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
But such laws are almost exclusively used against women. That's why women rights groups in Istambul are planning to protest the law.

Well then that is bad.

But of course that suits you as well – to oppress women.

I am for oppressing women?

I learn something new ever day.

[Spoogepieces]

Why should it be legal?

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Adultery is going to be illegal with prison sentence in Turkey due to a planned law proposed by prime minister Erdogan. Reason for the new law is the "Holiness of the Family".

Is this an outrage according to your opinion?

Turkey will have zero chance of entering in a union with the EU if it has such a law.

Some of the requirements for entry are harmonizing laws and more importantly human rights with the rest of the states of the union.

In European culture having a mistress is often normal.

I'm in no way condoning adultery but it's a moral decision not a legal one and I myself would never do it except maybe if I met a lady who was into swingfests.

Turkey just isn't European in culture and thought.

A great leader of a western country once said "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the country".

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by forkies:
i'm surprised it isn't illegal in the usa, given the whole "sanctity of marriage" and all.....

Don't be suprised if a proposed bill has been leaked on to the net before discussing just that.

[deedar]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I would be against this if Adultery was just a victimless crime.

You mean like snortin' coke?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
It's for them to decide.

All I know is statisically 50%+ of men admit to being unfaithful at some point in their marriage.

Quite a few breaking the law here, and there I'm sure.

don't forget the 46% of women that cheat.

PS, I'd support the death penalty for adulterers.

[phoenixboy70]

if that would mean that fewer people will get married, i'm all for it.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Adultery is going to be illegal with prison sentence in Turkey due to a planned law proposed by prime minister Erdogan. Reason for the new law is the "Holiness of the Family".

Is this an outrage according to your opinion?

I don't know. I'm against most laws of this kind, but adultery is somewhat in a class by itself. It can be argued quite effectively that most sex acts are basically harmless, but the harm caused by adultery is just as real as any physical violation. That one doesn't even need "family values" to prop it up.

[Cody Dawg]

It especially hurts children.

---> Millenium.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
It especially hurts children.

---> Millenium.

Actually, I was talking more about the one being cheated on. But you're right; adultery can hurt children via the effects on their parents and the relationship between them.

That's just it. People talk about victimless crimes? Fine. Here are your victims.

[UNTeMac]

As much as cheating hurts, try this scenario:

A woman is being beaten by her husband and begins an extramarital affair because she wants to escape the relationship but can't divorce because she'll lose everything. Who's the victim? Is there a clause in there for circumstances like that?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by UNTiMac:
As much as cheating hurts, try this scenario:

A woman is being beaten by her husband and begins an extramarital affair because she wants to escape the relationship but can't divorce because she'll lose everything. Who's the victim? Is there a clause in there for circumstances like that?

I've never heard of a woman that got a divorce from a abusive husband and lost everything.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I am for oppressing women?

You want to force women to carry out unwanted children.
You want to imprison women who have a extramarital affair.

In my eyes this qualifies as oppression.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Millennium:
It can be argued quite effectively that most sex acts are basically harmless, but the harm caused by adultery is just as real as any physical violation.

Physical harm of adultery?? What are you talking about?

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by UNTiMac:
As much as cheating hurts, try this scenario:

A woman is being beaten by her husband and begins an extramarital affair because she wants to escape the relationship but can't divorce because she'll lose everything.

a) report the abuse (get restraining order if necessary)

b) break off the relationship ASAP

c) move out (if you can't afford it, stay with friends)

d) take a long time out (travel, party etc.)

e) start new relationship

if you are abused by your spouse, there is no way in hell you'll come out of a divorce "without anything" (financially).

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
You want to force women to carry out unwanted children.

No, I want people to be responsible for their actions. That includes the fathers of said children. That isn't me oppressing women.

You want to imprison women who have a extramarital affair.

Actually I said I was torn. And I was thinking more a long the lines of men cheating on women when I posted said post. As that is the example I gave. I am all about free will. So I probably wouldn't support this.

You see, I was looking at both sides of the spectrum. You just knee-jerked and called people names.

In my eyes this qualifies as oppression.

Well your eyes are crossed.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Millennium:
[A]dultery can hurt children via the effects on their parents and the relationship between them.

That's just it. People talk about victimless crimes? Fine. Here are your victims.

So in your opinion the children are better off with frustrated parents that yell at each other all day?

If it needs an external relationship for one partner to find the strength to leave marriage that might be better for all. Or maybe not. But that's not the states business to decide and enforce by threatening prison sentences.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
if you are abused by your spouse, there is no way in hell you'll come out of a divorce "without anything" (financially).

Yeah I said the same thing. That applies to America. Maybe not Turkey.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I want people to be responsible for their actions. That includes the fathers of said children.

Just that the fathers can not be forced to carry out unwanted children – it's biologically impossible.
As a man you simply can not understand what you physically and mentally demand from a woman to go through in such a situation. But you constantly express the desire to exert power over women. That is oppression.

You [...] called people names.

I didn't call anybody names here.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Just that the fathers can not be forced to carry out unwanted children – it's biologically impossible.
As a man you simply can not understand what you physically and mentally demand from a woman to go through in such a situation. But you constantly express the desire to exert power over women. That is oppression.

If the woman doesn't want such responsibility she shouldn't be doing the act.
That isn't oppression. That is expecting people to be responsible for their actions. And as far as the father being forced to carry out unwanted children, I didn't mean it in that way Einstein. Nor did I present it in that way. I know a lot of women that have had abortions that did it NOT because they wanted to. But because the father was a dead beat and refused to take responsibility for his actions.

I didn't call anybody names here.

You are calling me an oppressor. And you are wrong.

Expecting people to be responsible for their actions is not oppressing.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Physical harm of adultery?? What are you talking about?

When did I say adultery caused physical harm? It generally doesn't unless there's some kind of force involved, and that's not called adultery anyway; it's called rape., and in this case the victim is very different.

The emotional harm, however, is every bit as real and every bit as devastating as pretty much any physical thing you could do to a person.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
You want to force women to carry out unwanted children.

As opposed to allowing them to kill the children because they don't want them? A shame, perhaps, but it seems a far lesser crime. Pregnancy can be a terrible thing, but it ends, and its timetable has been mapped out in more detail than almost any other biological process. Death isn't like that.

You want to imprison women who have a extramarital affair.

Imprison? Certainly not; in this, the proposed law goes too far. Also, last I checked this law applied to men as well.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
So in your opinion the children are better off with frustrated parents that yell at each other all day?

No, but they're better off eith parents who put in the work to fix their relationship. Or, in the case of relationships so far gone that they can't be saved, the children are better off with parents who have a quick, clean divorce.

If it needs an external relationship for one partner to find the strength to leave marriage that might be better for all.

Such a thing is never necessary. There are people who can't find the strength to leave or fix a marriage, but there are support networks for things like this. Perhaps they should be better-advertised, perhaps not, but either way it does not excuse the harm brought on by extramarital affairs.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
if you are abused by your spouse, there is no way in hell you'll come out of a divorce "without anything" (financially).

Indeed. And if the divorce laws in Turkey allow for this to happen, then they should be fixed.

Frankly, I'm in favor of a system whereby if a marriage ends due to abuse by only one party, then the abuser is not entitled to any of the joint property from the marriage, nor any custody of the children. In the case of mutually-abusive marriages, place the children in foster care pending psychiatric evaluations of both parents, and place the joint property in trust until the children reach the age of majority; neither parent gets any of it. In other words, amend divorce laws to punish abusers and punish them severely.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
If the woman doesn't want such responsibility she shouldn't be doing the act.

It is possible to become pregnant even when taking the pill in rare cases. It is possible that a condom tears. Responsible behaviour is no guarantee to not become pregnant.
It is possible to become pregnant after being raped. To force someone to carry out the child of the own rapist is one of the most cruel thing one could do against someone. And you can do it against women only.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
It is possible to become pregnant even when taking the pill in rare cases. It is possible that a condom tears. Responsible behaviour is no guarantee to not become pregnant.

You didn't read what I said. If you do not want that responsibility don't do the act. Well all know what causes pregnancy. If you are engaging in sex, EXPECT to be a father or mother no matter WHAT precautions you are taking. That goes a long with the responsibilities of having sex.

It is possible to become pregnant after being raped. To force someone to carry out the child of the own rapist is one of the most cruel thing one could do against someone. And you can do it against women only.

Actually I am torn on that one. I know a gal that had a baby and loved it like no other from a rape. She didn't see it as cruel. She saw aborting as cruel though.

But anyhow, this thread isn't about abortion. Take such straw-men elsewhere.

This thread is about infidelity. Don't derail the thread anymore than you already have.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Millennium:
As opposed to allowing them to kill the children because they don't want them? A shame, perhaps, but it seems a far lesser crime.

Abortion isn't a crime, because it is ending pregnancy, not killing a human being. It's just a few cells that belong to the body of the woman, and if she decides to remove them it's her right just like she can have her appendix removed if she wants to.

Whether you like it or not, in the first few weeks the woman is the master above life and death, not the religious nutbags.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Abortion isn't a crime, because it is ending pregnancy, not killing a human being. It's just a few cells that belong to the body of the woman, and if she decides to remove them it's her right just like she can have her appendix removed if she wants to.

WOW I have never seen anyone try to rationalize it that way. I am truly sickened. And you call religious people nutbags. Maybe your mom should have decided to remove her "appendix" before you was born.

It is indeed killing a growing and living human being. No matter how you try to rationalize it.

I see you aren't big on taking responsibilities for your actions. And it's of no surprise to me.

AGAIN take your abortion rant elsewhere. There is already a thread going on about it now.

This is about infidelity.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Abortion isn't a crime, because it is ending pregnancy, not killing a human being. It's just a few cells that belong to the body of the woman, and if she decides to remove them it's her right just like she can have her appendix removed if she wants to.

That's junk science.

Although an embryo is not morphologically similar to a human being, it has its own genetic makeup, and so cannot be considered a part of the mother any more than any other foreign entity. Forther, it carries out all of the processes which are considered necessary by science for an entity to be considered alive. The idea that an embryo is not a distinct, living human being cannot be backed up by any science we know today. Back it up with philosophy, back it up by religion, or whatever, but don't pretend to have the backing of science.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I see you aren't big on taking responsibilities for your actions. And it's of no surprise to me.

Zimphire, I take full responsibilities for my actions. But I'm not forcing my views on others like you love to do.

This is about infidelity.

This is about men oppressing women by means of religious laws. Just look at the situation of women in Saudi Arabia to see where that leads to.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
Zimphire, I take full responsibilities for my actions. But I'm not forcing my views on others like you love to do.

TENENAL when have I FORCED my view on others? You are being a drama queen. Please quit it. I am posting my opinion. Part of taking responsibility for your actions is to know that the things you are doing now, can cause a effect you might not be prepared for. And when that comes up, you take responsibility for it. You don't get rid of it because it's not convenient or is going to cramp your style. That isn't taking responsibility for your actions.

This is about men oppressing women by means of religious laws. Just look at the situation of women in Saudi Arabia to see where that leads to.

READ THE THREAD! IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT WOMEN!!! IT'S ABOUT MEN TOO!!!

You need to plant your feet, give a nice, firm yank, and pull your head out of your ass.

[Cody Dawg]

Brilliant, Millenium:

Although an embryo is not morphologically similar to a human being, it has its own genetic makeup, and so cannot be considered a part of the mother any more than any other foreign entity. Forther, it carries out all of the processes which are considered necessary by science for an entity to be considered alive.

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Although an embryo is not morphologically similar to a human being, it has its own genetic makeup, and so cannot be considered a part of the mother any more than any other foreign entity.

OMG. we've been over this so many times. an embryoin the early stages is NOT a human being, in the same way a sperm or an egg is a "human being". science makes a clear distinction there.

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
TENENAL when have I FORCED my view on others?

You are against abortion and you don't want anybody have an abortion under any circumstances.
I'm against abortion, but I accept that under certain circumstances it is done. I don't want to force women to carry out children no matter what because as a man I can't full grasp what pregnancy even means.

You see the difference?

READ THE THREAD! IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT WOMEN!!! IT'S ABOUT MEN TOO!!!

Then let me quote from the BBC article I linked to above:

"Women's groups and liberal commentators have condemned the bill, saying it would be used against women [...] The BBC's Virginia Gidley-Kitchin says adultery used to be illegal in Turkey until 1996, when the Constitutional Court struck the law down because it penalised women more than men.

Men were deemed to have been adulterous if they were involved in a long-term affair; but women could be charged if they were unfaithful only once. [...] Canan Arin, of the Women's Rights Centre at the Istanbul Bar Association, says it is a violation of the constitution protecting individual's privacy.

"Everyone has the right to demand respect for his private and family life," she said. Ms Arin fears the bill will work against women, as traditional women are reluctant to complain about their husbands.

"If they bring it, it will provoke honour killings more than ever," she said."

On paper such laws might apply equally to men and women, but in a patriarchic society like in Turkey they are used to oppress women.

[Spoogepieces]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
OMG. we've been over this so many times. an embryoin the early stages is NOT a human being, in the same way a sperm or an egg is a "human being". science makes a clear distinction there.

Yes, science identifies an embryo as a complete new genetic individual from the mother or father (unlike sperm or eggs).

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by TETENAL:
You are against abortion and you don't want anybody have an abortion under any circumstances.

Yes, but where have I forced that issue? I haven't forced ANY woman to not get an abortion. These are my opinions. And I am allowed to have them.

I'm against abortion, but I accept that under certain circumstances it is done. I don't want to force women to carry out children no matter what because as a man I can't full grasp what pregnancy even means.

What a crock of poo. You don't have to grasp such a thing.

"Women's groups and liberal commentators have condemned the bill, saying it would be used against women [...] The BBC's Virginia Gidley-Kitchin says adultery used to be illegal in Turkey until 1996, when the Constitutional Court struck the law down because it penalised women more than men.

Men were deemed to have been adulterous if they were involved in a long-term affair; but women could be charged if they were unfaithful only once. [...] Canan Arin, of the Women's Rights Centre at the Istanbul Bar Association, says it is a violation of the constitution protecting individual's privacy.

"Everyone has the right to demand respect for his private and family life," she said. Ms Arin fears the bill will work against women, as traditional women are reluctant to complain about their husbands.

"If they bring it, it will provoke honour killings more than ever," she said."

On paper such laws might apply equally to men and women, but in a patriarchic society like in Turkey they are used to oppress women.

AGAIN WE weren't talking about just the plan in Turkey. WE were speaking about the concept in general.

AGAIN, pull your head out of your lower oriface.

[UNTeMac]

Originally posted by phoenixboy70:
a) report the abuse (get restraining order if necessary)

b) break off the relationship ASAP

c) move out (if you can't afford it, stay with friends)

d) take a long time out (travel, party etc.)

e) start new relationship

if you are abused by your spouse, there is no way in hell you'll come out of a divorce "without anything" (financially).

Maybe here...but Turkey?

[TETENAL]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes, but where have I forced that issue? I haven't forced ANY woman to not get an abortion.

Good. Then we aren't even much in disagreement. No need to resort to profanity.