ChrisJones
-
Content Count
10,219 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
39
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Posts posted by ChrisJones
-
-
I'm kinda a curious now, though. Those that do think it should carry a criminal penalty... what is punishment to fit the crime? Stoning? Acid attacks?
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
But technically it is illegal in over 20 states isn't it, in fact in some states it's a felony?
I honestly don't know. I just don't think it should be criminalised. I wouldn't do it, regardless, that's the promise I made. Government has no business in the private lives of (people) consenting adults.
-
3
-
-
48 minutes ago, WILF said:
However, I can understand why in cultures that still have their particular faith at their core it is criminalised.
I fully understand it too but liberty and faith aren't always good bedfellows.
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Francie said:
Your over simplyfiying it chris,there is no punishment in law here,but it's a scummy thing to do.
I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm stating that adultery shouldn't carry a criminal penalty.
3 hours ago, Francie said:Why cant they just be honest up front an saying I want to get divorced,instead of been a sleazy scumbag?
As I said earlier in the thread. This is the risk/reward with the traditional marriage. If there was even a moments hesitation they shouldn't marry in the first place, IMO. Honesty clearly won't factor into this by the very nature of what we're discussing.
3 hours ago, Francie said:What if your wife was shagging your best friend behind your back,could you forget all about it?an move on?
Consenting adults an all that .........
Here's the crux of it. I'm utterly sure that would never happen. As certain as you'll ever be about anything. If I wasn't I would never have married. Again I'm stating that adultery shouldn't carry a criminal penalty. You're free to do as you please providing it's with consenting adults an all that.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
But don't you think the other party/parties need to be taken in to account?
I wouldn't have been married as long as I have if I didn't take other people's feelings into account.
I'm merely stating that adultery should not carry a criminal penalty.
As someone who isn't married why are you worried about adultery?
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, Greb147 said:
All I'm saying we are quick to judge others and we can all be hypocritical on certain touchy subjects.
I'm not judging anyone. How can there be a crime commited between consenting adults?
-
Just now, Greb147 said:
I'm using it as an example when you stated only the absurd would call for adultery to be illegal.
The US military is absurd. Behaviour between consenting adults shouldn't be illegal and face legal consequences.
1 minute ago, Greb147 said:I have never been married.
Hebrews 13:4
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
Are they at a higher percentage than found in the general public?
What's the difference? You're using the US military as a measuring device. Baffling given your audience.
1 minute ago, Greb147 said:I'm speaking about you not caring religion and such. I said I imagine at that moment you were reciting your vows that they meant a lot.
I didn't recite vows. The legal ceremony was the signing of papers. It works for us.
How long have you been married?
-
7 minutes ago, W. Katchum said:
Ofcourse you can, that’s why we got the word Cnut
Even that's censored!
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
May are ask are you married mate, if so you must have cared when saying your vows?
I am married and have been for over 20 years. I've never worried about affairs at any time. We agreed to monogamy and we stuck to it. Monogamy isn't for everyone.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
Why shouldn't it then, do members of the US military have a higher moral compass the rest of us?
Of course one could choose not to join the military if they feel like they can't keep it in their pants.
No. Just a backward version of how consent works. Look at the sexual assault cases in the US military for context.
-
2 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
Not necessarily true, adultery is actually a crime in the US military under the UCMJ.
Good job that doesn't apply to anyone here.
-
3 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
Ok so does that excuse adultery whilst under the vows of marriage?
It doesn't excuse anything.
5 minutes ago, Greb147 said:They can be free to pursuit whatever they like, that's called a divorce mate.
Consenting adults can do what ever they want. If you don't want the risk don't sign the papers.
6 minutes ago, Greb147 said:And what about the implications for innocent parties like kids?
What about it?
7 minutes ago, Greb147 said:The facts are adultery is a sin in the Bible, if folk can go against it's preachings as they feel fit then what's the point of marriage in the first place?
And?
I've never really cared about the bible or it's 'teachings.'
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, W. Katchum said:
I got a few pals who say it, I’d kill me mossus if she left, or is never talk to her again or let the kids talk to her, one my mates who left his wife cos he was seriously unhappy an depressed had his ex stop all custody, the guy is a mess
only selfish deluded control freaks who can’t handle rejection would think like that imho
Honestly, mate. If it happened to me I'd be devastated but to think that there should be some legal penalty and that the guilty party should be imprisoned, or worse, on some vengeance trip is, frankly, f*ck*ng bonkers!
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Greb147 said:
It's too late though isn't it once they have become your significant other.
If it only was as simple as a written contract, that tells nothing of the emotional turmoil suffered in some instances.
This is the risk/reward of the traditional relationship. They aren't your property they're independent people with their own pursuits to life, liberty and happiness.
I agree with you about the emotional turmoil but life is hard. Get a helmet.
-
4
-
-
Just now, Greb147 said:
Not very moral though is it?
Doesn't matter. If your significant other stepping out on you is cause for concern then should they be your significant other? If they're happy with that decision and you're not then you're free to null whatever contract is on the table.
-
1 minute ago, Greb147 said:
Opening your legs to another whilst under the vows of marriage certainly isn't controlling one's actions.
It is if you consented to it.
-
2
-
-
Just now, Francie said:
Aye scumbags chris lol
100% mate but they have the ability to piss down people's backs and convince them that it's raining... sound familiar?
-
1
-
-
On 28/09/2021 at 10:42, Francie said:
What the f**k is this,making a tv series about one of the worst known nuances in the world,sick BBC scumbags.
It's genius when you think about it. They get to control the narrative. They get to look like they care instead of having to excuse the fact they covered for him. Not to mention continued to pay him.
They get to sell the story at home, through the TV license, and abroad through licensing rights and the whole time the money will come rolling in while everyone believes that they're truly a quality journalism provider and they provide an essential public service.
-
1
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, WILF said:
so they are trying and once again the state is saying “f**k you!”
It's a revenue generator, plain and simple. They get to extort money through the threat of legal penalty. You pay the fine or you suffer the consequences. One side, however, gets to change the rules any time it sees fit.
Has anyone tallied up the amount of stealth taxes in Britain yet?
14 minutes ago, WILF said:I don’t believe that many people actually “want” to be in receipt of benefits, if you let folks keep their money that problem would largely solve itself imho
I'd agree with you if we're referring to benefits in the traditional guise.
I view benefits as redistributed taxpayers money. They dish out money without care for quality or value to greedy organisations/indivduals that seek the influence it brings.
I believe there are, and never will be, a shortage of those benefits seekers.
You know how I would solve that so no need to go over it again!
-
1
-
-
On 27/09/2021 at 14:45, WILF said:
And just like that, despite 75 years of evidence, we were discussing who’s better out of Tory & Labour !
@ChrisJonesThis
mate is why only the lot burning to the ground will change anything !
It's almost like we're trying to understand that if we don't trust them why do we keep voting to make them bigger?
If you started cutting the public sector and letting the average bloke keep his money, and spend it on what he wants to spend it on, maybe fewer would be living hand to mouth.
Cutting benefits would make people take up the work that's available instead of having to drag labour in from other parts of the globe...
We've done this before though... It ain't changing. Either gradually or razing it to the ground. I'll just have to accept that I'm the idiot/wanker/traitor etc for leaving!
Just keep telling yourself... Taxes are the price we pay for living in a civilised society...
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, WILF said:
You create a political vacuum where someone will step in and address it first of all.
And then you elect them, it can be done, Orban is living, breathing proof.
How? The word sheep gets thrown around a lot on this forum but I genuinely question how you would achieve that vacuum.
If the vacuum were achieved there will be a lot of shooting before we get to the point of elections.
6 minutes ago, WILF said:We wasn’t this shit show in 1939, so it took 73 years to destroy the nation that we were upto the end of the war……if it can be destroyed then it can be rebuilt, we just need the collective will to make it happen (and suffer the pain of making it happen) and then we put the right people in place to manage the job.
Would you agree that post WW2 Britain has a much different mentality than post Gulf war Britain? The people that lived through air raids and rationing Vs lattes and wifi?
I believe that it can be achieved without razing it to the ground but the public hasn't got the will, or even the want, to gut Westminster and start over with representation and governance as opposed to rule.
If you average working bloke had his money back and it was working for him the way he wants to do it I do truly believe that we would see a return to a degree of community and identity that I think we can all agree is lacking to some extent.
We don't need a government strongman to hit the reset.
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, W. Katchum said:
You think if we start a rumour that there a shortage of jobs, the lazy selfish cnuts among us will actually get one
Imagine if Downing St said "We're cutting all unemployment benefits and refunding the equivalent tax money back to workers. You have 18 months to comply..."
-
27 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:
Tipping point…. It’s well past that.
Can't argue with that. Mine was 20 years ago.
10 minutes ago, WILF said:Its a learned behaviour and it can be unlearned !……we just need to create the conditions.
Can it? Look at the reaction the recent round of protestors are getting. Any protests for that matter. Pick a place. Any where in the world. If you agree with the message it's a fundamental right to assembly. If you don't it's water cannons and rubber bullets.
How do you create those conditions?
-
1
-
PC Wayne Couzens
in General Talk
Posted
I don't think we were. Scripture plays a big part in that. Monogamy isn't for everyone and a recent study suggests Cluedo is a viable alternative.