NIMN used the word "blame" and that's what I was responding to. I mean if my best friend bangs my wife, yes, obviously it's a dick move. If it's some guy who's never met me, well, not so much.

wow, you're really stubborn on this, I wonder how far I have to go before you'll admit this (to me) pretty self-evident truth.

Would you seriously have no moral qualms about sleeping with another guy's wife? If a married woman offered you sex, are you seriously saying you shouldn't bother thinking about any husband or kids that woman has, any home you may be destroying?

If the answer is yes, I either don't believe you, or you are kidding yourself, or you are unfortunately a sociopath.

Well if he's saying that someone has a moral responsibility not to sleep with a married person then he's wrong imo. I was under the impression he was saying it's a distasteful thing to do.

Honestly if I didn't know the guy I would. I'm not potentially destroying their relationship, she is.

Are you saying it isnt unethical for the military to benefit from the recruiting of underprivledged males that came from the poverty that the government created?

In many cases, probably not. Its not like abused sex workers are rational economic actors. Survivors of abuse have real issues that are serious barriers to them doing things we take for granted, like holding down a minimum wage job. Let alone ever getting through school and making the kind of money they could possibly make in the sex trade.

To me, admitting that your best friend doing it is different to some random guy doing it, suggests to me, that sometimes, you think we should think about the consequences of our actions and how they may foreseeably affect other people. Even when these actions are voluntary and non-coercive...

Wrong. My best friend has moral obligations to me implied by our friendship. A stranger does not.

You have to realize that an awful lot of people are going to consider that a really ****ing scummy thing for you to do.

Are you saying it's not? I'm starting to get confused who's on whos side again? can't we talk about teh roadz and hating poor people? I know where I stand there.

So when you said this -

... you didn't really mean it did you? We do have responsibilities towards others and other peoples' well-being.

Depends on the situation imo. I wouldn't try to seduce a married woman but if she came on to me, well...

Why is it a super scummy thing to do again? You realize that if a married woman is seeking out sex partners things probably aren't so great on the home front. I'm going to have to go out on a limb and say that I'm probably not going to be singlehandedly breaking up the happy family if I bang her.

LOL

No, I meant it. My friend is not responsible for my happiness. However, there are a number of obligations that he has to me if we are going to continue to be friends. These obligations include but are not limited to:

--Not stealing my stuff
--Not banging my wife
--Being someone I enjoy being around

Ok, so by realizing that trying to seduce a married woman is kinda wrong, can you now admit that we should consider the well-being of other people in a voluntary exchange, whether they are directly a party to it, or whether they are not a party to it, but would be affected by that transaction?

No, but you are clearly contributing to it. I haven't necessarily spoken about a crazy married woman, just out looking for ****. Things can be much more nuanced and complex than that, I believe in some sort of (non-enforceable) moral obligation to not try to encourage women to cheat on their husbands.

agree completely that you have no moral obligation to not let a woman cheat on her husband

its none of your business, let her do what she wants to do

No. How can you really know what the effects of the transaction are? If they are positive or negative? You are being presumptuous and paternalistic in saying you know better than the participants of the transaction.

So no sort of obligations can be extended to the feelings or well-being of strangers? We can't make any sort of moral judgments on people who pay no attention to the well-being of strangers? That seems to be what you're saying.

Try this -

I'm walking around a lake and I see someone who can't swim fall off their little boat into the water. I'm standing right by one of those little life-rings. All I have to do is throw them it to them and their life is saved. However, I think: "**** you, I don't owe you ****. I don't have to throw you the ring." They drown.

Hey it's not my fault the person fell into the water!

Leaving aside whether it is enforceable or not, is there some sort of moral obligation for me to throw the stranger the ring? How would you view me if I did not throw the ring to them?

So you've never made any sort of judgment on the non-violent behaviour of others for fear of being presumptuous and paternalistic. If you are breathing, and typing on a keyboard that just isn't true.

Well it is your business if you're encouraging her to bone you...

Of course you should throw them the life preserver.

I've got 5000 posts here, should be easy to find one of me passing judgment on someone's non-violent behavior.

There's no obligation to throw the ring, you're a super scumbag if you don't.

Not sure if this counts, but I looked for 30 seconds and came up with you passing judgment on ElliotR's "trollmodding."

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...3&postcount=14

How dare you pass judgment on someone for choosing to not throw the ring! Why should they care about another person needlessly dying!

Wait, did this guy sleep with my wife?