Nothing wrong with getting some on the side if you can afford it. Look at Hugh Hefner. Most women are in it for the money anyway.
2006-12-26 06:56:53 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
We might be in it for the money..but god is real..and ur going to hell for saying he is imaginary SUCKA
2006-12-26 06:58:44 · answer #1 · answered by Tina C 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Two points:
1.) Neocon Realism is an oxymoron. I believe time has shown the neocon belief system to be anything BUT realistic.
2.) Hugh Hefner doesn't cheat; he's totally straightforward about being a playboy. It's not about how many women (or men) you can get, it's about having the integrity to admit who you are, what you want, and what you do. If you're not lying about it, you're not cheating.
Even most of the neocons had integrity. They actually believed in their cause. A few rascals used it for personal gain and didn't mind lying about it. Those people would be reprehensible even if they weren't neocons (or elected officials...)
Finally, as far as the "in it for the money thing" --
that's just a sad and alienated perspective. You should have more respect for yourself.
2006-12-26 07:31:29 · answer #2 · answered by Sir N. Neti 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
No, infidelity is NOT okay.
First off, even if you choose to subscribe to no moral code at all, there is the risk of contracting a disease and bringing it back to your partner. Then there is the fact that it destroys the trust that is an integral part of true intimacy and oneness. Third, it deprives your partner of what should be exclusive to the two of you alone.
I resent your cavalier assumption that "most women are in it for the money anyway." Would you say that your mother was one of these? And do you feel that if you're free to cheat, your partner should have the same freedom?
Quit reasoning like a child and start thinking like an adult.
2006-12-26 07:04:49 · answer #3 · answered by Chrispy 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
some truth in what you are saying here
after some, and some more (much) careful thoughts and feelings.
Since we don't want to live "on the side", why should we try to get some "on the side". I think if you are happy with your partner and gettin enough, tell them and just be happy. If you aren't, you have to decide, will you go nuts or get violent if you can't get some? If so, tell your partner(s) and go get some.
Some men and women make economic exchanges involving comfort and or sex. I think its ok but sad mostly.
The best thing when the exchange is even in bed I think. And when the people really love each other. Then if theres some money, its good, but who would even care much?
2006-12-26 07:04:14 · answer #4 · answered by kurticus1024 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
If you're only reason for not cheating is God's existence then your assertion is correct.
I care not whether God exists or not, for I think that his existence does not/should not affect a persons actions. What changes if you know for certain God exists? What changes if you know for certain "he" does not? For me, absolutly nothing, I continue to try to be a moral and decent person.
But for a "bad person" your assertion may well apply to them. Their actions may change due to a fear of God/going to hell. But I think that if an act is done with some ulterior motive it is still a bad act, perhaps not for those affected by the person's bad act but it definatly is for the person's spiritual development and internal well being.
2006-12-26 08:18:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why do you think God is imaginary? It is your life and you used God being imaginary to live in sin.As for Hugh Hefner, you are not! keep your cheating ways , you will find out that nothing good comes to cheaters and you will find yourself alone one day. It will catch up with you, and may God keep you.
2006-12-26 07:04:08 · answer #6 · answered by BLUE 3 · 1⤊ 6⤋
Nope
2006-12-26 06:58:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
2 points
2006-12-26 06:58:59 · answer #8 · answered by diva 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Non sequitur. Your conclusion does not follow logically from your premise. What difference does it make to an evolved moral sense that god is imaginary. Gods imaginary status is not logically linked to you justification for cheating.
2006-12-26 07:49:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
um you are way off base. just because there is no almighty being doesnt mean society does not have morals - and it doesn't mean you shouldnt have morals either. i do not understand your rationaliization. you have a very poor attitude towards women. i dont know where that came from but i would venture to say you have had some bad experiences.
2006-12-26 07:00:05 · answer #10 · answered by bbq 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋