Originally Posted by Zichao
|
|
A lot of religious people would say that any infidelity at all is cheating.
|
Cheating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :
Cheating constitutes doing anything, whether verbal or physical, that one would not do in front of their significant other. Such examples would include: expressing attraction to another person, talking, electronic communications, texting, data, kissing, making out, and sexual relations.
Basically, the matter of "deceit" is central. If your significant other either doesn't care, is made aware and is okay with your behaviour, it is not 'cheating'. It means you have a non-monogamous arrangement.
|
Quote:
|
|
But what if one of them's totally in favour of forced marriage and the other one isn't?
|
Then, surely, cheating isn't the biggest issue you have. Marital rape and/or domestic violence and/or honour killing and/or in-family kidnapping are probably higher on the agenda.
I mean, how is a marriage where one of the spouse supports forced marriage and the other doesn't is even supposed to happen?
|
Quote:
|
|
Well okay, what if you're a hardline communist and believe that liberal democracy is inherently undemocratic?
|
Then, as I said, you argue on "reasonable grounds but not moral ones" - you state "all property is theft" and thus feel entitled to steal the medicine because you've redefine your theft/confiscation as "redistribution" or whatnot rather than 'theft'.
The Soviets may have 'stolen' everything from the Russian aristocracy but they validate it as saying it's a fair confiscation, a redress. OTOH, they were perfectly happy to execute peasants hiding grains on the basis that they were stealing from the community/soviet.
Thus, the moral absolute against thievery remains but you just vary the definition of thievery to suit your needs/thinking.