celticlord
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,344
- Reaction score
- 3,794
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Unless you're arguing that he forced his attentions on the woman, this is a non-argument. She chose to enjoy a man besides her husband--any moral indignation on that side of this soap opera goes to her not to Ensign.Well, Kandahar, I have no respect for someone who has an affair with a married person. So even if I thought, "Well, he and his wife were separated," I would be reminded that the woman with whom he screwed around with was married herself. He is an asshole.
Unless you're arguing that he forced his attentions on the woman, this is a non-argument. She chose to enjoy a man besides her husband--any moral indignation on that side of this soap opera goes to her not to Ensign.
The only thing that makes a woman "off limits" is a Smith & Wesson in the hands of the man to whom she belongs. A ring don't mean squat in that regard.well, no. Just because it is not your marriage does not mean you should not respect it. As long as he knew she was married, he should also have known she was off limits.
The only thing that makes a woman "off limits" is a Smith & Wesson in the hands of the man to whom she belongs. A ring don't mean squat in that regard.
Just the reality of relationships.Woah! Testosterone overload there!
It is truly fascinating to see how many on the right say, "Who cares?" I felt that way yesterday, but that was before I found out:
(1) he called for Clinton's impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky scandal;
(2) he called for Larry Craig's resignation for his bathroom scene (which didn't even amount to physical contact);
(3) he is a member of "Promise Keepers," which says they are "Men with Integrity." Home - Promise Keepers
He's a ****ing loser, and I am thrilled that this has come out and that his chances of running for president in 2012 are gone. Buh-bye, you unfaithful jerk.
Being separated from one's spouse is not a termination of the marriage.
That has no effect on the sanctity of marriage, just John Ensign.John Ensign Affair: GOP Senator Admits Relationship With Ex-Campaign Staffer
Will their be as much outrage from the GOP and right wing as there was with John Edwards?
Didn't this guy take to the Senate floor defending the sanctity of marriage?
Why would he discriminate against gay marriage on one hand using the sanctity of marriage argument and the violate that same sanctity.
Apparently he was "friends" with the womans husband, whom also worked for him.
Unless you're arguing that he forced his attentions on the woman, this is a non-argument. She chose to enjoy a man besides her husband--any moral indignation on that side of this soap opera goes to her not to Ensign.
Bully for you. You're still wrong.I stand by my assessment whether you think it's a non issue or not.
Anything that doesn't agree with exactly how you feel about something is a non-argument or non-issue. If celticlord doesn't see things your way, it has no validity whatsoever. Blah blah blah blah
I would be shocked if the majority of people said it's okay for a single person to have an affair with a married person since the single person is, well, single. Even if I was in the minority in feeling that it's immoral to come on to a married person, I wouldn't care. I stand by my assessment whether you think it's a non issue or not.
Bully for you. You're still wrong.
Somehow, I doubt that.I'm done reading yours posts.
Just the reality of relationships.
If a man wants to keep his woman, he needs to be taking steps to ensure no other man comes and takes her. If he doesn't, another man will come and take her.
The only person who's a total loser in this soap opera is the husband. Going back for hush money makes him a pimp, not a man.
Wow. Talk about cave man mentality.
So, in CL world, women are merely props to the testosterone laden violence of men, right? We're property that will stray if not watched (with a loaded gun).
Is that really how you see male/female dynamics?
This is definitely one of the most bizarre assessments of the marital relationship that I've ever read.
Didn't you know that women are not people?
Wow, talk about ignorance.Wow. Talk about cave man mentality.
You are partially correct--yes, my woman is my property. What other men do with their women is for them to figure out.So, in CL world, women are merely props to the testosterone laden violence of men, right? We're property that will stray if not watched (with a loaded gun).
That is how you see what I said from the perspective of your high horse.Is that really how you see male/female dynamics?
No more bizarre than your apparent desire to be neglected and anemically handled by the male of the species.This is definitely one of the most bizarre assessments of the marital relationship that I've ever read.
Just the reality of relationships.
If a man wants to keep his woman, he needs to be taking steps to ensure no other man comes and takes her. If he doesn't, another man will come and take her.
The only person who's a total loser in this soap opera is the husband. Going back for hush money makes him a pimp, not a man.
Wow, what a completely wrong and inane thing to say.Didn't you know that women are not people?
You are under several mistaken impressions.I was under the mistaken impression that women are people, but Cavemanlord disabused me of that notion.
Wow, what a completely wrong and inane thing to say.
You are partially correct--yes, my woman is my property. What other men do with their women is for them to figure out.
As for the straying bit, allow me to translate into a more politically correct liberalese to see if that will penetrate: If man or woman is neglected by the other, if the needs of the one are not attended to by the other, those needs are going to ultimately be met by someone else.
Ah yes, the knee-jerk reaction: "insecurity".Nah, it actually sounds like the realities of an incredibly insecure man. Any man who is secure in his relationship doesn't need to use lame threats of guns and violence. At first I thought you were joking around because of the absurdity of your posts. It's sad that you are actually serious about this.
Wow, talk about ignorance.
You are partially correct--yes, my woman is my property.
If man or woman is neglected by the other, if the needs of the one are not attended to by the other, those needs are going to ultimately be met by someone else.
A common attribute of the feminine personality is a desire to be wanted, desired, and valued. What a man desires, he defends. What he does not defend, he does not desire overmuch.
That is how you see what I said from the perspective of your high horse.
No more bizarre than your apparent desire to be neglected and anemically handled by the male of the species.
Ah yes, the knee-jerk reaction: "insecurity".
Because I defend what is mine, I am insecure?
Because I value what is mine, I am insecure?
I have commented at length on my willingness to fight and die in defense of home and country. Why on earth should I value my woman any less than these?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?