Horrible Marriage?


I am going to watch the film again because I really don't recall any hard evidence of a horrible marriage that was "dead" as some posters here are claiming.

I am open-minded enough to go back and check. I will even read the script as well.

It was clear Jack and Carolynne were estranged, but there to my recollection is no indication at all that the marriage is "horrible" or "dead."

But, I won't make an ignorant case here. I haven't watched the film with that part as a focus. I want to make sure I have the facts so I am going back to the film.

Note : Horrible marriage or not, raping someone's marriage of any hope of repair is selfish, sleazy, and destructive.

Way to go Emelia.

Way to go.

reply

[deleted]


1. Jack pointed out to Emelia that Carolyn may not need him.

2. When Jack and Emelia first kissed, Jack admitted he is afraid of hurting his wife.

3. "I have a son, that's more than a marriage" says Jack.


Jack did indicate the marriage was strained in the above yes. But there is no indicate AT ALL that this marriage was "dead" as many here have claimed.

That's absolute *beep*

More importantly, before Jack found out about Emelia's pregnancy he was determined to save his marriage if nothing else for the sake of his son.

Guys there is no indication AT ALL in this film that the marriage is dead.

Sorry, nice try. I unlike some people actually WATCHED the film LOOKING for evidence and there is NO evidence to suggest Jack and Carolyn's marriage was over, dead, or history.

Their son was happy, but lonely. Understandable with two busy professionals for parents. You don't get to be a top lawyer or top doctor by spending all day with your kids.

Jack indicated that he wasn't satisfied with his marriage, but it does not follow from that statement that the "marriage is dead." That's ridiculous.

Both Jack and Carolyn lived under the same roof, presumably in the same bed. All of this before the marriage as trashed by Emelia pursuing Jack.

And she DID pursue him. Jack was not pursuing her.

Emelia even admitted that Jack didn't even "know [she's] alive" until they went on their business trip to Oakland.

So, all you people claiming the marriage is dead. You are not watching the movie.

There's no indication the couple is separated
There's no indication there was any domestic violence
There's no indication either was preparing or had filed for divorce prior to the affair.
There's no indication Jack or Carolyn was even considering moving out.

That's a strained marriage in need of repair. Not a DEAD one. lol

You people need to watch the actual MOVIE and get your facts straight.

And more to the point, you guys claiming the marriage is dead appear to be as ignorant about the effectiveness of marriage therapy as Jack is.

Neither of you are even considering it as an option.

You're as ignorant as Jack is.

Pretty pathetic given he's an educated professional. He's certainly capable of looking up the phone number of a good marriage therapist.

Despite Jack's infidelity, the fact that he wanted to save his marriage after his affair with Emelia is a credit to him.

It's just a shame Emelia got pregnant and completely screedw that marriage up for good.

reply

You want to talk about a straw man? Where is the proof that Emelia got pregnant JUST to screw up the marriage for good? She was on the pill and got pregnant why are you making up that other scenario of her "getting pregnant on purpose?" and how do you do that by yourself again? You're really diluted and I wasn't saying the marriage was dead I said neither Carolyn nor Jack tried to save it why didn't you address him choosing to take her on the trip?

And BOTTOM LINE this movie was about WAY more than him leaving his wife. Watch the TRAILER...the trailer guides you thru the important narratives in the film not the minor ones. You watched a whole movie that was 20 percent about the affair (a FRIGGIN FLASHBACK FOR CHRIST SAKES) and then 80 percent about the new family unit of Jack, Emelia and William and them all working to be a family. Watch the movie for the bigger picture and main intent of the director, and the original writer of the book.

This isn't a film about infidelity, or a critique or analysis of it...it's not the focus. Please let it go and watch the movie for what it really represents. Infidelity happens....this is just a slice of life after a new marriage with a kid from a previous one and baby in the new one who dies. It's about THAT the two kids and the new family and Emelia adjusting and coping. She pushed away "the TWO PEOPLE THAT LOVE HER WILLIAM AND JACK" as a result of her own grief and then realizes that's where she wants to be. Sheesh. Watch the trailer man. William grabs her hand in it as they are walking too...forgot about that part. Get off the leaving his wife part! it's a SMALL part of the film!

reply

You want to talk about a straw man? Where is the proof that Emelia got pregnant JUST to screw up the marriage for good? She was on the pill and got pregnant why are you making up that other scenario of her "getting pregnant on purpose?" and how do you do that by yourself again?


Yet ANOTHER straw man.

I never said she got pregnant on PURPOSE.


didn't you address him choosing to take her on the trip


There is no indication IN THE FILM that Jack took Emelia to Oakland in order to have an affair.

By Emelia's own admission Jack from her perspective didn't even know she was alive.

There's nothing to criticize on jacks' end for bringing her to oakland. Their plane seats were even in separate sections.

He flew business class and she was in coach.

There's no indication he was planning on having an affair at all there.


And BOTTOM LINE this movie was about WAY more than him leaving his wife


Straw man.

No one said the bottom line in the film was about him leaving his wife.

I have never argued that at all.

I have only said there are several character arcs in the film and several plot lines.

That's ALL I said.


This isn't a film about infidelity, or a critique or analysis of it...it's not the focus.


I never said the "focus" of the film is about infidelity.

Yet another straw man.

I will however point out that there are not one but three plot lines that involve infidelity.

I don't think that' was a writers coincidence.

Emelia -> Father
Emelia -> Jack
Carolyn -> Jack

All three of those plot lines have infidelity rooted in them.

I don't think that is an accident.

Writers don't write accidentally lol


Please let it go and watch the movie for what it really represents. Infidelity happens....this is just a slice of life after a new marriage with a kid from a previous one and baby in the new one who dies. It's about THAT the two kids and the new family and Emelia adjusting and coping. She pushed away "the TWO PEOPLE THAT LOVE HER WILLIAM AND JACK" as a result of her own grief and then realizes that's where she wants to be.


This is the plot-line YOU are focusing on.

You are simply asking everyone else to focus on the plot-lines that interest YOU.

And you misrepresent that with this "really about" business.

The film has multiple layers to it to examine. Yours is no more "real" than the plots I am discussing and others are here.

If you want to discuss a baby that died and William then go ahead. But don't try to fool people into thinking the plotline you are discussing is what the film is "really about".

Only an idiot would accept such an assertion.

reply

Yes you did re-read your post...you said she GOT pregnant to screw things up. You're a fool. I'm done. You're condescending and want me to address you respectfully. not gonna happen you sound very young.

reply


Yes you did re-read your post...you said she GOT pregnant to screw things up. You're a fool. I'm done. You're condescending and want me to address you respectfully. not gonna happen you sound very young.


That does not mean it was deliberate.

But it really doesn't' matter.

She was already working towards tearing that home apart by having an affair.

She even invited jack to MOVE IN WITH HER and he told her no.

The damage by then was already half done.

She may not have gotten pregnant deliberately.

But she knew he was married and she deliberately pursued him, she deliberately had sex with him (presumably multiple times), and deliberately invited him to move OUT on his wife and move IN with her.

All her, all deliberate.

reply

She could have done anything, it was HIS CHOICE to cheat. He could have said no and respected his marriage. She didn't rape him as far as we know. So it's all on him.

reply

She could have done anything, it was HIS CHOICE to cheat. He could have said no and respected his marriage. She didn't rape him as far as we know. So it's all on him.


HE didnt' rape HER EITHER

It is on BOTH of them.

Emelia and Jack both act promiscuously. They are both guilty.

If anyone is more to blame it is Emelia. Emelia was pursuing HIM. She met him and deliberately went out of her way to pursue him. He was struggling with a difficult time in his marriage. What is Emelia's excuse? She was horny?

Please. SHe is guilty.

reply

Again Emilia could have moved, earth, sky and sea, it was his choice to give in. She didn't force him into anything. She is not responsible of his marriage , vows, committement. He is. It doesn't mean that what she did is right, but it was HIS choice.He had other choices:Try to work things out with his wife or file for a divorce, leave the marriage. Cheating isn't an option that can be justified in any way. No one forced him into anything.Emilia was horny, in love, ..whatever...she was SINGLE. Wasn't cheating on anyone or betraying anyone. She's not the one married. who made vows, who was supposely committed to someone else. HE WAS.

reply

Here we go again...


Again Emilia could have moved, earth, sky and sea


Emelia COULD have just left the couple alone to resolve their marriage without her interference too. She could move earth and sky, OR she can just leave them the hell alone and find a SINGLE MAN like most women do. lol



, it was his choice to give in.


And it was HER choice. SHE gave in to HER impulses just like he did.

She is responsible for her choices and he is responsible for his. THAT is how ADULTS resolve accountability. He chose to get involved in a secret promiscuous relationship as did she.


She didn't force him into anything. She is not responsible of his marriage , vows, commitment. He is


And he didn't' force her either. They BOTH CHOSE to adult like spoiled teenagers rather than grown adults. And professional attorneys at LAW no less.


She is not responsible of his marriage , vows, commitment. He is.


She is obligated to respect other people's marriages yes. People don't VOW to leave each other's automobiles alone either, but we DO expect people to not steal cars. If they DO steal a car, vow or not, they go to jail. Why should a third party trespasser violating a marriage show less respect to an actual living human family than we hold people to respect our automobiles?

Blaming HIM for HER behavior is just childish. Sorry, but in the world of GROWN UPS, when YOU DO something that is YOUR behavior that YOU own. ADULTS don't get to misbehave like Emelia and point the finger at others. THAT is what CHILDREN do. She's an adult an a PROFESSIONAL ATTORNEY for God's sakes.


It doesn't mean that what she did is right, but it was HIS choice.


It was HIS choice and it was HERS as well. EITHER of them could have said "no" and no infidelity occurs. You REALLY need to get it into your head that BOTH of them are grown adults and you don't get to point fingers at other people when you misbehave. EVEN if they misbehaved with you. If two or three people rob a bank, they ALL get prosecuted. Pointing the finger at each other gets laughed out of court. That is what CHILDREN, CRIMINALS, and apparently infidelity partners do. They shift blame instead of owning their bad behavior.

They BOTH chose to lie, sneak, and cheat. That is it. BOTH acted freely with full knowledge of their choices. If he LIED to her and told her he was SINGLE she would have my support (to some degree). That is not the case here. They BOTH are cheats. Sorry.




He had other choices:Try to work things out with his wife or file for a divorce, leave the marriage.


They BOTH had choices. She could just leave him and the family the HELL ALONE. lol

You really have got to stop pointing the finger at someone ELSE when this is a grown adult woman behaving this way with full knowledge of his situation. She is NOT a CHILD here. They BOTH VIOLATED a marriage and a family here. BOTH of them.


Cheating isn't an option that can be justified in any way. No one forced him into anything.


You have GOT to give up on this forced him crap.. That is a STRAW MAN. lol

Let me be CRYSTAL clear on this point:

NO ONE ON THIS FORUM SUGGESTS SHE FORCED HIM to have SEX WTIH HER. NO ONE. So STOP SAYING IT. NO ONE disagrees with you.

Despite this, the fact that no one forces him does NOT exonerate Emelia at all here. They are both grown adaults. They both sneak around and cheat. That is it. BOTH of them.


Emilia was horny, in love, ..whatever...she was SINGLE.


Technically she was infatuated. Love does NOT grow in those kinds of situations.


Wasn't cheating on anyone or betraying anyone. She's not the one married. who made vows, who was supposedly committed to someone else. HE WAS.


She WAS cheating Carolyn out of a reparable marriage. She STOLE TIME from Carolyn. Every HOUR Emelia and Jack spent in SECRET COULD have been used in couples therapy or something more constructive.

You have this ridiculous idea that being single means you have the right to:

a. trespass into marriages in secret
b. steal time away from a committed man and his family
c. have sex in secret and create illegitimate children that put both betrayed spouse AND wayward husband in a precarious position

You have the idea that being SINGLE means you don't have to respect anyone's marriage, that a woman can sneak into any marriage she pleases by virtue of her single status and do whatever damage she pleases.

Sorry, but being SINGLE does NOT mean a person gets to act like a SPOILED TEENAGER. Being SINGLE has responsibilities just like being married does. I hold single people to the same standards of maturity and adulthood as any married person.

Single OR married you respect other people's homes. You respect their material property, you respect their marriages, AND you respect the families that make up that home and marriage.

SINGLE OR MARRIED you are obligated to act like an adult.

Emelia cheated Carolyn as much as Jack did. It does NOT matter if she vowed anything or not. She had NO DAMN BUSINESS getting involved with Jack and she KNEW it. She AND he chose to start something they had NO BUSINESS starting. BOTH of them.

STOP SHIFTING BLAME. NO one is exonerating Jack here. They BOTH misbehaved. They both cheated Carolyn. They both violated a marriage, a home, and a family. They both misbehaved. BOTH of them.

I really don't care who makes vows. The ACT is the issue, not the vow. The ACT is that of violating a marriage, a home, and a family in secret. They BOTH did that.

Emelia is no better, and no worse, than Jack here.

Stop shifting blame. Stop with the straw man arguments. NO ONE is going to accept you shifting blame over to Jack 100% and NO ONE here said she forced him to have sex with her.

They both acted like infants. And they both did a LOT of irreparable damage. They are BOTH accountable 100% for the bad choices they made together. BOTH of them. They BOTH had a chance to show some impulse control, some restraint, and some maturity. Instead, they BOTH chose to act like a couple of juveniles. They are BOTH a shame to their professions, and a shame to adulthood in general. I know ten year olds who show more self-restraint than they do. BOTH of them.

reply

She could have but see, it’s not her responsibility to do so. It’s his choice to either work on his marriage or cheat. Again, Emilia is responsible of her behavior, not his, definitely not of his marriage.That’s not on her.

Emilia chose to date a married man. Bad choice, but she wasn’t cheating on anyone. Again he’s the one who cheated, who disrespected his vows and wife.

Again Emilia’s choice shouldn’t matter and woudn’t affect the marriage had the husband chose not to give in, not to cheat. Again, stop trying to put the responsibility of the damages on the third party when the one committed is the one responsible.The thing is that Emilia alone couldn't have caused any damage at all unless she forces him. So Emilia's actions and choices wouldn't have affected the marriage hadn't the husband chose to cheat.

2of 3 people rob a bank? In order for the one who didn’t to be blamed, he had to take somehow part in the robbery. Otherwise he can’t be blamed for any of it. His actions must have had direct consequences. Emila could do whatever she wants, her actions wouldn’t have any consequences had the husband not chose to cheat. Huge difference.

You need to get in your little head that she couldn’t “violate “a marriage hadn’t the husband chose to. Again she didn’t force him into anything. It was the husband’s decisions and actions that allowed Emilia’s choice to affect the marriage. Unless she forced him, blackmailed him, drugged him, raped him,..there is nothing she could have done that would affect the marriage hadn’t the man chose to cheat on his wife.

She didn’t steal anything. He chose to cheat instead of going to couples therapy. He’s the one who chose to give that time to someone else instead of using it to work on his marriage. Not Emilia’s responsibility.

You have this ridiculous idea that people can be stolen. Try again. Her behavior isn’t right but it needs the cooperation of the committed one in order for it to affect the relationship. There is nothing that Emilia could have done hadn’t the husband chosen to cheat. No one can do damage to a marriage unless one of the two married people allows it, chooses to cheat.That simple.






reply


She could have but see, it’s not her responsibility to do so. It’s his choice to either work on his marriage or cheat.


Nope. It is BOTH their choices. They are BOTH adults. Seriously.. it is LONG TIME to stop blaming one person and letting the other off the hook here. They are BOTH GROWN ADULTS.. and PROFESSIONAL ATTORNEYS. TIme to grow up and own your behavior here. They BOTH made choices. I really don't care for comparing one to the other or blaming one over hte other. My concern is that they both are identified as dishonest and destructive here.

It is her responsibility as an ADULT to leave married men alone. She's a God damn lawyer and ought to know better.


Again, Emilia is responsible of her behavior, not his, definitely not of his marriage.That’s not on her.


No one said she was responsible for HIS behavior. She is responsible for hers yes. She IS responsible for the DAMAGE SHE DID to the marriage, as is Jack responsible for the damage HE did to his manage. That is BOTH OF THEM. They both did the damage. AGAIN... Please stop letting people off the hook and shifting blame. That is a child's game.


Emilia chose to date a married man. Bad choice, but she wasn’t cheating on anyone. Again he’s the one who cheated, who disrespected his vows and wife.


She WAS cheating CAROLYN yes. Just as much as Jack was, Emelia cheated Carolyn yes. Emelia disrespected Carolyn and her marriage to Jack yes. AGAIN you are shifting blame here. I really don't see the point in pushing blame on one over the other. They both conspired together and knew what was going on.


Again Emilia’s choice shouldn’t matter and wouldn't affect the marriage had the husband chose not to give in


And I can say the SAME for Emelia. lol HE would have have cheated with Emelia if Emelia had kept her legs closed. SHE opened them up. More blame shifting here...


Again, stop trying to put the responsibility of the damages on the third party when the one committed is the one responsible.The thing is that Emilia alone couldn't have caused any damage at all unless she forces him. So Emilia's actions and choices wouldn't have affected the marriage hadn't the husband chose to cheat.


I am putting them on BOTH of them. Jesus why does no one get that? BOTH are responsible commitment or otherwise.

If I drive you some place and you forget to lock your door... and the car gets stolen do I not have the THIEF arrested? lol

Emelia and Jack caused the damage TOGETHER.. TOGETHER.

STOP shifting blame on one person over the other, it is STUPID and CHILDISH.

IF two people rob a bank they BOTH get charged. The police don't sit there and play the blame game.


2of 3 people rob a bank? In order for the one who didn’t to be blamed, he had to take somehow part in the robbery. Otherwise he can’t be blamed for any of it. His actions must have had direct consequences. Emila could do whatever she wants, her actions wouldn’t have any consequences had the husband not chose to cheat. Huge difference.


Her MOUNTING a MARRIED MAN has no consequences? lol What a bunch of *beep*

They BOTH CHOSE to cheat. They BOTH chose to LIE, to SNEAK, and to CHEAT Carolyn here.

Every HOUR of every DAY those two played house in secret Carolyn and Jack could have used constructively instead. Jack AND Emelia WASTED those hours of that marriage. BOTH Of them.


You need to get in your little head that she couldn’t “violate “a marriage hadn’t the husband chose to. Again she didn’t force him into anything.




It was the husband’s decisions and actions that allowed Emilia’s choice to affect the marriage.


Nope, it was HER decision AND his decision. No one more than the other.


Unless she forced him, blackmailed him, drugged him, raped him,..there is nothing she could have done that would affect the marriage hadn’t the man chose to cheat on his wife.


And AGAIN we can say the same for Emelia... unless he raped her, drugged her, blackmailed her, there is nothing he could have done that would affect the marriag either.. hadn't SHE chose to cheat Carolyn.

HE could choose to keep his pants on and SO COULD SHE. MORE childish blame shifting here.. its getting pretty repetitive.


She didn’t steal anything. He chose to cheat instead of going to couples therapy. He’s the one who chose to give that time to someone else instead of using it to work on his marriage. Not Emilia’s responsibility.


She stole TIME. The mot PRECIOUS commodity to any grown adult.

They BOTH chose to.. AGAIN I am just repeating myself here. Emelia could have left him ALONE or even PUSHED him into couples therapy instead of cheating with him in secret. Again this is just silly blame shifting.



He’s the one who chose to give that time to someone else instead of using it to work on his marriage. Not Emilia’s responsibility.


Nope, they BOTH chose to use that time together to have sex and play around.. BOTH of them. It does not matter who's responsibility it is.. They are BOTH ADULTS here.. and both are responsible AS adults.

Third party trespassers do not get a free pass here unless they are under age, sorry. The law does not shift blame, and neither do I.


You have this ridiculous idea that people can be stolen.


Nope. I have a realistic idea that a marriage, home, and family can be violated by a third party trespasser in secret. It happens all the time. The wayward spouse invites them AND the third party trespasser allows it just as much.

I didn't say any PERSON was stolen. lol

I said the marriage was violated,, TIME was STOLEN and WASTED that COULD have been used honestly and constructively instead.

Its not much different than playing hooky from school. Time could have been used for education is wasted at the mall.


Try again. Her behavior isn’t right but it needs the cooperation of the committed one in order for it to affect the relationship.


lol And HE needs HER cooperation.. otherwise its rape. And that was NOT rape.


There is nothing that Emilia could have done hadn’t the husband chosen to cheat


Same goes for the other. I am just repeating myself here. You have made NO argument as to why ONE is to blame and the other gets off the hook, you just keep asserting your position.

They both lie, sneak, and cheat.. they are both to blame.


. No one can do damage to a marriage unless one of the two married people allows it, chooses to cheat.That simple.


And no married person can violate a marriage with infidelity without the help of a third party either. IT is that SIMPLE. lol

AGAIN.. I am NOT blaming ONE over the other .. I hold them both accountable like adults.. equal rights AND equal wrongs in this country..

They are both adults. No logical reason to hold one accountable and let other off the hook here.

If Jack had LIED to Emelia that he was SINGLE then you would have an argument to make. That is however not the case here.

reply

Never said you argued anything but you are clearly stuck on the infidelity aspect. And he DID request HER to accompany him on the trip thats just a fact of the movie watch it. And he followed her to her room. She was at her door and he told her his room and she was like "We already passed that floor" HE FOLLOWED HER UP THERE so she took her opportunity since she'd been wanting it. He was totally at fault for requesting her than following her to her room.

reply


Never said you argued anything but you are clearly stuck on the infidelity aspect. And he DID request HER to accompany him on the trip that's just a fact of the movie watch it. And he followed her to her room. She was at her door and he told her his room and she was like "We already passed that floor" HE FOLLOWED HER UP THERE so she took her opportunity since she'd been wanting it. He was totally at fault for requesting her than following her to her room.


There is no indication at any scene of that film that Jack WANTED or REQUESTED her to go.

Marilyn brought her tickets and told her she's going.

Emelia said it wasn't her case
Marylin said it is Jacks' case

She told Emelia if she doesn't like it she can discuss it with Jack.

That's the full details of the exchange.

This does NOT mean that Jack made the decision. Her being assigned to his case could just have easily have been upper management directing her to speed the project along. It happens in business all the time.

He may have made the decision, but there's no indication he did that. Even if he had made the decision there no indication in any scene before Oakland that it was for any reason other than business.

I HAVE a copy of the film. I can check any claim you make here against it any time. I DO check your claims against the film. That's why they re so easy to refute. I stick to the facts. lol



And he followed her to her room. She was at her door and he told her his room and she was like "We already passed that floor" HE FOLLOWED HER UP THERE so she took her opportunity since she'd been wanting it. He was totally at fault for requesting her than following her to her room.


Yup, that was after they'd been talking all day.

Again there is no indication he was planning an affair with her before that day they worked together.

Yes, I will accept him following her to her room was inappropriate to say the least.

They working privately in that office together all day was inappropriate as well.

This is how company infidelity starts, privacy and opportunity.

You can conjecture that he was watching her in secret and was fantasizing before Oakland, but there's NO SCENE in the FILM that supports that conjecture.

I just checked the beginning of the film as well. There are only TWO Scenes with her and Jack in the same room before their firm assigns her to Jack's case.

Jack barely looks at her in the first scene since he's helping Marilyn to a chair and at the Christmas party he does NOT look at her at ALL.

I have NO IDEA where your idea is coming from that he was planning to have an affair comes from.

The only time he looked at her was when they started working TOGETHER in Oakland. That is where he was watching her. That's the first time we see that.

SHE had been watching HIM for MONTHS prior to Oakland. That is a fact. Emelia had even disclosed to her friends that she was infatuated with him and had been for weeks.

Emelia's claim that he doesn't' know she's alive is supported by his behavior in the scenes up to Oakland trip. There's nothing there on Jack's end until Oakland when they work all day in private and start talking about their personal lives.

THAT is a bad idea.

How in the WORLD is he "totally at fault" for following her to he room? lol

That's ridiculous.

Or do you mean it is his fault he followed her?

It reads like you are suggesting the whole affair is his fault and that he engineered the whole thing. THAT would be ridiculous. She'd been watching him fantasizing about him for weeks.

If you simply mean its his fault he followed her, yes I'll accept that. lol

How are you going to argue accountability and them having sex?

I suppose she just accidentally fell on him and he took advantage of her?

Is that how you plan to spin that? lol

reply

and maybe you shouldn't watch movies involving infidelity even in the smallest respect as was with this film. You would probably break your television watching movies like Closer, Chloe, or Unfaithful. This movie barely touched on it and you lost all sight of the bigger picture and weren't able to see the movie for it's true purpose. FAMILY. This is clearly a sensitive issue for you and very close to home and personal to the point where it clouds your judgement.

reply


and maybe you shouldn't watch movies involving infidelity even in the smallest respect as was with this film. You would probably break your television watching movies like Closer, Chloe, or Unfaithful. This movie barely touched on it and you lost all sight of the bigger picture and weren't able to see the movie for it's true purpose. FAMILY. This is clearly a sensitive issue for you and very close to home and personal to the point where it clouds your judgement.


lol

More attempts to change focus with this "real" and "true" garbage.

What kind of idiot do you think would fall for that kind of argument?

Oh, what I am talking about is "real" and "true" and his posts arne't.

Give me a break. That's an argument a five year old can refute.

You can play mind reading games all night if you want to. They won't bug me you just look foolish. How close I am to infidelity or not has no bearing on the weight of your argument. It's just more ad hominem crapola.

I started posting in disgust at posters pathetically trying to use this film to legitimize infidelity.

It's ignorant and pathetic.

reply

If two people are happily married, they will not cheat on their spouse. If they aren't happily married, the marriage will end - it's just a matter of time. I don't condone a woman pursuing a married man, but it takes two to tango. You don't have an affair alone. Jack didn't need to leave Carolyn. If they both had wanted to save their marriage, he could have supported Emilia's child but remained with Carolyn and William. Carolyn was pissed, but she moved on pretty quickly. She just enjoyed being a bitch to Emilia. I don't blame her, but it wasn't good for William. Carolyn's anger blinded her to that. And God! Rubbing her daughter's death in her face (Children aren't safe around you!) was beyond cruel.

"Oh, please, just shut up. You're wounding my soul!"

reply


If two people are happily married, they will not cheat on their spouse.


This is false. There are countless surveys of infidelity showing cases where both spouses indicate their marriage is/was "happy".

Infidelity happens in marriages on gentle shores as well as rougher ones.

Your claim is false.


If they aren't happily married, the marriage will end - it's just a matter of time.


This claim is false as well. There are hundreds of family therapists practicing in North America that repair marriages that are troubled.

Your claim is again false.


I don't condone a woman pursuing a married man, but it takes two to tango.


Ya ya ya.. your statement is ridiculously cliche at this point. It's also a straw man.

NO ONE on this forum is exonerating Jack to my knowledge. SO your claim is a straw man.


Jack didn't need to leave Carolyn. If they both had wanted to save their marriage, he could have supported Emilia's child but remained with Carolyn and William.


Yes,I agree with you. The better choice would have been to

a. NOT have an AFFAIR in the first place.

Given this happend.

b. OWN IT and explore marriage therapy with your spouse Carolyn and offer financial support for your illegitimate child


Carolyn was pissed, but she moved on pretty quickly..


Uh no.

First off, she wasn't "pissed". She is and was HURT by her husband's BETRAYAL of their marriage and Emelia's VIOLATION of her marriage.

HURT, not "pissed."

Second, and this is the more complex point so bear with me, we don't know HOW LONG a timespan we are working with between the demise of Carolyn and Jack's marriage and Carolyn's second marriage.

To my knowledge, and please feel free to correct me with any facts you like if I have missed them, but there is no indication in the film or screenplay of an actual TIME FRAME here.

The plot begins SOMETIME after Emelia's child Isabelle passed on. We aren't at any point told "it's been six months" or whatever.

Given that William is talking about selling the baby's stroller and crib you can conjecture the items have been sitting about in their home unused for some time. But that's conjecture on my part and I am fully ready to back away from that.

We are given no time frame though to my knowledge.

So HOW can you say Carolyn moved on quickly?

You can't since we don't' know how long she took to process this.

How long between Jack's admission of infidelity to Carolyn and Carolyn's marrying her second husband?

We are given NO CLUE.

It is at LEAST nine months since there WAS a baby born between that period.

And as I have said above we can conjecture the baby's been gone for several months since William is suggesting to sell the baby's stroller and crib.

So, at least nine months + Emelia's processing the loss of Isabelle

And how long in the main plotline between the beginning of the film when Emelia picks William up from school and the END when Carolyn gets married?

How long a timespan is that?

Again we don't know.

So, claiming that Carolyn "moved on pretty quickly" is again false.

And, let's be honest, Jack "moved on" without even IFNORMING HIS WIFE. We don't know how long his affair was going on before they got pregnant either do we?

So, if anyone "moved on quickly" between the two of them the finger should be pointed square at Jack. That is undeniable.

We can't say Carolyn moved on quickly OR slowly without some dates.

No dates, no justification to claim the time is short, so your claim, is false.


She just enjoyed being a bitch to Emilia. I don't blame her, but it wasn't good for William. Carolyn's anger blinded her to that. And God! Rubbing her daughter's death in her face (Children aren't safe around you!) was beyond cruel.


Enjoyed being a bitch? That's a bit of mind reading here.

I agree, it's not good for William. Carolyn's HURT blinded her to that. Carolyn's hurt drove her to "rub Isabelle's death in Emelias face" as well.

It's a shame Jack and Emelia traumatized Carolyn so much William had to experience this.

Infidelity is the catalyst here and this film does portray rather well how much damage results from this kind of hurtful nonsense doesn't it?

reply

It couldn't have been more than two years, probably closer to one, until Carolyn re-married, and she was pregnant at the time.

It's a shame Jack and Emelia traumatized Carolyn so much William had to experience this.
If Carolyn had been less vindictive and thought more about her son that herself, she wouldn't have said things that hurt William. Her love for him should have been stronger than her anger at Jack and Emilia.
I wonder if you would you be such a cheerleader for Carolyn if she'd been cheating too.


"Oh, please, just shut up. You're wounding my soul!"

reply


It couldn't have been more than two years, probably closer to one, until Carolyn re-married, and she was pregnant at the time.


OK, so Carolyn waited a year before moving on.

And Jack waited...

Hold on...

He DIDN'T wait.. that's right... JACK CHEATED! lol

So what is your point here? lol

You are just strengthening the case to give Carolyn a break. lol


If Carolyn had been less vindictive and thought more about her son that herself, she wouldn't have said things that hurt William. Her love for him should have been stronger than her anger at Jack and Emilia.


Carolyn was not "vindictive", she's Hurt.

Why does Emilia get a free pass to act like a spoiled child for the run of the film but Carolyn does not?

They BOTH had a loss to process. They BOTH had to run the course of the film to get there.

They BOTH deserve a break.

I AM giving Emilia a break for her childish behavior AFTER losing her baby.

I have ZERO sympathy for her thoughtless actions BEFORE that, particularly her home-wrecking.


I wonder if you would you be such a cheerleader for Carolyn if she'd been cheating too.


No I wouldn't be at all.

But, that's irrelevant because there's no evidence in the film to suggest she is.

Infidelity is selfish, sleazy, and destructive.

I don't like seeing anyone do it.

reply

Precisely. Emilia was dead wrong to date a married man but fact is that her actions wouldn't have any effect at all on the marriage hadn't the husband chosen to cheat. Had he decided to not give in, to work on his marriage and stick to it, Emilia could have moved earth, sky and sea, it wouldn't touch the marriage, it wouldn't affect it in any way.

This is someone who want to twist it as "he was weak men can't say no, she tempted him and he just gave in, had she not to, he wouldn't have,blablabla..." taking the responsibility off of the one actually responsible and put it on the third person

reply


Precisely. Emilia was dead wrong to date a married man


And Jack was wrong for the same thing.. they both cheated Carolyn out of all that time. Add humiliation and betrayal on top of that and you have a world of damage.


but fact is that her actions wouldn't have any effect at all on the marriage hadn't the husband chosen to cheat.


And his would have had zero impact if she just told him to keep his pants on. SHE chose. HE chose. BOTH of them.

You aren't arguing here, you are just asserting and shifting blame here. It's childish. When you have children you will understand this blame game is childish and stupid.


Had he decided to not give in


They BOTH gave in. He pursued her and she pursued him. They both surrendered to their impulses. NO ONE more than the other. Again you keep wanting to blame one over the other and there is no logical reason to hold one to blame and not the other here.


Emilia could have moved earth, sky and sea, it wouldn't touch the marriage, it wouldn't affect it in any way.


And Jack could have moved earthy, sky, and sea... and gotten NO WHERE if SHE had kept her legs closed.

GROWN WOMEN ought to know better than to get involved with married men.. its CLICHE. lol

AGAIN not blaming her more than him. They BOTH are equally responsible conspirators here.


This is someone who want to twist it as "he was weak men can't say no, she tempted him and he just gave in, had she not to, he wouldn't have,blablabla..." taking the responsibility off of the one actually responsible and put it on the third person


Nope. I have said COUNTLESS times now that they are BOTH adults and BOTH responsible. NO ONE tempted anyone. NO ONE talked anyone into anything, no one seduced anyone. That is childish *beep* and i don't buy it.

They are BOTH adults, both equally responsible.

You have yet to make any argument as to why one ought to be held responsible and not the other. I have said many times now as equals, as adults, and as professionals they both lie, they both sneak, and they both cheat. They BOTH are to blame equally.

BOTH lie by omission
BOTH sneak in secret
BOTH have illegitimate sex (neither had any business having sex with the other)
BOTH steal time away from nurturing a marriage, and use to sabotage it instead.
BOTH degrade the quality and intimacy of the marriage. BOTH

Rather than trying to blame one or the other why not ask a simple question..

WHY must it be one OR the other? Why on earth can't you just hold them both equally accountable?

They both got together with full knowledge of their situations, both chose to abandon all impulse control, and both betrayed and disrespected Carolyn in secret.

They both effectively hung a big KICK ME sign on Carolyn's back for months and giggled away in secret.. BOTH Of them.

reply

She didn’t cheat anyone, She doesn’t owe Carolyn anything. She’s not the one committed to Carolyn

She’s not responsible for his marriage, If he doesn’t care when he’s the one supposely committed, why should she? Why should she be the one to worry about his marriage when he doesn’t?

I blame the one committed, in a relationship or married. I don’t blame the third person unless they forced them to it. I don’t approve their behavior but I don’t consider them responsible for the destruction of a relationship. That falls on the person who was cheating on their partner, who was in a relationship or married and couldn’t respect their committement.That’s not on the third person who’s single and not cheating on anyone.Sorry but the excuse”she came after me, she threw herself at me, I did nothing wrong’ just doesn’t work.

Again, she’s not responsible for his marriage. He is. She’s not the one who made vows and should be working on/ fighting for the marriage. He is. If his marriage means so little to him and he’s willing to destroy it cheating on his wife, it’s not up to her to keep him from it.

For me they’re not equally responsible at all. Actually the third person is not responsible at all. She doesn’t owe anything to his wife. She’s not the one committed. He is. Again, nothing could affect the marriage unless the married person allows it. The third can’t do anything without it.If the third person ‘succeeds to destroy the marriage” it’s because the cheating partner allowed it. That cheating partner is responsible for the marriage, not the third person.


reply


She didn’t cheat anyone,


She cheats Carolyn every time she sneaks into bed with her husband yes. She has no business in that bed with him. Nor he in bed with her. They BOTH Cheat Carolyn equally. There's no logical reason to exclude her when shes right there in bed with him. They both know he's married and they both choose to climb into bed and do sleazy things together.

She doesn’t owe Carolyn anything.


She owes Carolyn RESPECT. Everyone owes a person respect for goodness sakes. Hell I hold doors for perfect strangers every day. I RESPECT people enough NOT to crap on their lives, homes, or their families.

Infidelity is at the very least, an act of disrespect. As I said before, its not unlike a practical joke: hanging a kick me sign on someone's back and giggling away until they discover it.

And like a lot of practical jokes, only the two people hanging the sign on her back are laughing. Everyone else is pretty disgusted.


She’s not the one committed to Carolyn


They both owe Carolyn enough respect that they don't crap on her marriage, home, and family in secret. People go to jail for less obnoxious things than that.

Carolyn is not asking a lot here. She really just wants Emelia to LEAVE her MARRIAGE ALONE. But, Jacks' an ass and Emelia's no better. They both disrespect Carolyn and crap all over years of work in secret.

She’s not responsible for his marriage,


Never said she was. But she IS PARTLY responsible for its demise when she involves herself with Jack, a married man, in secret.

Jack invites Emelia to sabotage a marriage in secret (pretty sleazy of him), but Emelia AGREES. Emelia COULD have taken the high road and that whole mess could have been avoided.

EITHER Of them could have taken the high road and things would have turned out a LOT better. It only takes one to walk away.. Unfortunately they are BOTH too damn immature to act like adults and do the right thing.

If he doesn’t care when he’s the one supposedly committed, why should she?


Emelia can care about her own integrity
Emelia can care about her self respect
Emelia can care about a marriage she has no business tampering with
Emelia can care about Carolyn - the wife of her co-worker
Emelia can care about William
Emelia can care about her own family and friends, and the difficult position this puts them in
Emelia can care about Jack's marriage out of professionalism to a co-worker
Emelia can just care about a marriage because she WANTS to be a good person


I have spoken to people who's marriages were struggling. ALL marriages struggle from time to time and have rough patches. However UNLIKE Emelia I did NOT lie, sneak around with either spouse, or have sex with either of them in secret. I sat down with one of them and listened. Then I sent them HOME. That's what ADULTS do.

Just because JACK is an ass, that does not mean Emelia has to be an ass too. I know a LOT of women who have enough integrity to NOT put themselves OR another woman in that situation.

I am not suggesting Emelia DO anything other than just NOT get involved.

THAT takes LITERALLY NO EFFORT. lol

She COULD have gotten involved constructively, but you are right, that's not her responsibility.

At the very least, I expect EVERY grown adult to leave a struggling marriage alone. That's NOT hard to do. If she got involved to better the marriage, super duper, she gets some bonus points. All anyone can ask if that you don't tamper with someone else's marriage, EVEN if the sleazy husband invites you to do so. It never ends well.


Why should she be the one to worry about his marriage when he doesn’t?


Same as above. She does not have to worry, all she has to do is leave it alone.

Let me put it this way. If I walk by a house and notice it's on fire. I can do the following:

a. run in and save the family inside if possible
b. walk away and not make things worse
c. toss a can of gasoline on there and loot the place

I don't EXPECT everyone to do A.
I hold everyone as adults accountable to do B. THAT is BARE MINIMUM and takes NO effort to just NOT get involved.

C is obnoxious. Children and criminals behave this way, not grown adults.


I blame the one committed, in a relationship or married.


You do blame him. I do too.I hold them both accountable though. Courts of law don't cater to this "his fault/her fault" nonsense. If you are involved in the offense, you are held accountable for it. No one MAKES anyone do anything. What Emelia did.. she CHOSE to do, and she COULD have left them alone. She IS accountable for getting involved to the family's detriment, just as Jack is involved for straying. They both could have been MUCH better. Instead they both act like obnoxious brats and Carolyn and William suffer the disrespect for it.


I don’t blame the third person unless they forced them to it.


Yep. I got that loud and clear. Sorry, but the law and most ethical systems dont' let people off the hook on these technicalities. If you get caught trespassing into someone else's marriage, that you could have just left alone, you as as much to blame as the wayward spouse.

EXCEPTION: Some men LIE to women and pretend they are single. I give those women a break. UNLESS Its been like five years and she hasn't' even been to his house yet. THAT is a woman who is in denial.

I don’t approve their behavior but I don’t consider them responsible for the destruction of a relationship.


Not solely no. She had LOTS Of help from Jack. They both set fire to a home rather than doing repairs on it.

Emelia COULD have

a. picked William up from school (she's doing that now anyhow
b. baby sat William while Jack and Carolyn had date nights
c. invited Carolyn and Jack out for dinner with all her friends (helps couples sometimes)

Emelia COULD have put that effort to use constructively. As could Jack.

I am not blaming EITHER of them exclusively. They both act obnoxious.

No one suggested Emelia is soley responsible or soley a home wrecker.

Jack's a first class ass. Emelia is no better.


That falls on the person who was cheating on their partner


It falls on both of them. As I said before, they both owe Carolyn THAT much respect that they won't trash her marriage in secret.

I don't expect Emelia to run in and save them, but I do at the very least expect her to walk away and not throw gasoline on a house fire.

, who was in a relationship or married and couldn’t respect their commitment.


NEITHER Jack NOR Emelia respects Carolyn's marriage with Jack.

I have spoken with people at my workplace who talk crap about their spouses. I don't JOIN IN. I don't help their marriages, but I don't join in on the crap-fest either. It's NOT that hard to walk away. It's actually quite easy.

That’s not on the third person who’s single and not cheating on anyone.


We covered this. Emelia AND Jack STEAL from the marriage. They BOTH cheat the marriage by stealing and wasting time. Every hour, every day... its theft of time promised to another. Time that could be used to repair, rather than destroy.

Sorry but the excuse”she came after me, she threw herself at me, I did nothing wrong’ just doesn’t work.


No one's making those excuses. Arguing straw men and blaming Jack does NOT exonerate Emelia from culpability. You can hack on Jack all you want, it does not make Emelia look any less responsible.

Emelia's an adult not a child.


Again, she’s not responsible for his marriage.


She's responsible for any damage she does yes. She did plenty.

He is.


And he chose to SABOTAGE his marriage WITH Emelia rather than SECURE his marriage. Jack set his home on fire, and Emelia helped him pour on the gasoline. Partners in crime.

She’s not the one who made vows and should be working on/ fighting for the marriage.


Nope, she's not. We covered this. I don't expect her to work on a marriage that's not hers. I DO expect her to at the very least NOT trespass, infiltrate, and sabotage a marriage though. It is NOT hard to walk away. ADULTS do this all the time. It's called self-respect.


He is. If his marriage means so little to him and he’s willing to destroy it cheating on his wife, it’s not up to her to keep him from it.


Nope, it's not up to her. If Jack wants to romp around and troll loose women that's none of Emelia's business... UNLESS she CHOOSES to GET INVOLVED and MAKE it her business.

It's not up to her to protect his marriage, but it is up to her to not contaminate it.

I don't have to cut my neighbors grass, that's his job. But you won't catch me dumping crap on his lawn either. I walk away. If I DO get involved, I HELP him cut the crass and clean up his home. I don't set the yard on fire, even if he's handing me the gasoline can. I just walk away at that point and don't get involved. I expect EVERY adult to do that at the bare minimum.

For me they’re not equally responsible at all.


She's doing the same thing he is. She lies, she sneaks, and she cheats. She's just doing it from the outside-in while he works from the inside-out. Partner's in crime.


Actually the third person is not responsible at all.


Letting people off the hook for taking part in the destruction of a home is not something I advocate.

She doesn’t owe anything to his wife.


Again we covered this. Everyone owes a person enough respect not to sabotage their home in secret.

She’s not the one committed.


I am not committed to anyone either, but I don't make things worse for them. I don't promise to leave anyone's car alone, but I don't break into their cars either. I extend people that much respect that I don't screw with other peoples property. A marriage and family IS something delicate, that takes years to build. You won't catch me sabotaging anyone's home in secret. The fact that I haven't made any promises is irrelevant. I have more self-respect than that. I don't NEED to vow to someone to act like adult. I do that out of my own initiative.


He is. Again, nothing could affect the marriage unless the married person allows it.


And the same goes for Emelia. You have tried this argument before. If EITHER of them walks away, no affair takes place. BOTH of them need to commit to the destruction of the home or it does not happen.


The third can’t do anything without it.


And the husband can't do anything withou the third either. BOTH need to partner up in secret to commit infidelity.

If the third person ‘succeeds to destroy the marriage” it’s because the cheating partner allowed it.


They destroy the marriage as PARTNERS in crime. Neither one of them does it on their own. No one here is suggesting shes 100% accountable. Again this is another straw man.

He allows it, and SHE allow it. BOTH of them allow their affair to happen.

That cheating partner is responsible for the marriage, not the third person.


The third party trespasser is responsible for any damage they do yes. As is Jack responsible for any damage he does.

Again this childish finger pointing is silly. No adult weighs accountability this way. Each person is accountable for their own choices.

They both made bad choices. Choices that OTHERS (Carolyn, William) where NOT given. Carolyn and William's CHOICES where decided FOR them in SECRET by the other two.

It's marital rape at it's best.

reply

We can compare a simple analogy:

Two people conspire to rob a bank. ONE is a security guard employed by the bank; the other is a bank customer only.

They conspire in secret to rob the vault bit by bit each night, while the bank manager is clueless.

Of course the employee looks pretty darn bad robbing from a business he's employed to protect, but we don't let the customer walk. lol

We can criticize Jack all we want, nothing he did or did not do exonerates Emelia.


IF Jack LIED to her about his marital status, you would have an argument.



They are equal partners in crime here.

He made bad choices, Emelia made bad choices.

Blaming Jack for Emelia's choices is no better than blaming Carolyn for choosing a sleazy husband.

It's ridiculous to blame one person for the behavior of another.

And you do blame Jack, when you put all the blame on his shoulders here. lol

Adults make choices, and they are obligated to own them.

It makes no sense why you would exonerate a grown adult woman, a professional attorney, simply because
she didn't say "I do" at Carolyn's wedding.


Households are delicate, and critcal to sustaining life for communities. Pilfering one in secret,
invited or not, is something you choose to do.

You can't blame Jack for seducing her or any of that nonsense.

They both screwd Carolyn and William over. Onboxious, but it happens.

I am pleased to at least see the writers held true to reality and the affair crashed and burned: 95% of them do, statistically speaking.

reply

No matter how long your post is it misses the point.

Emilia isn't responsible for the destruction of the marriage at all. See, I'll take one of your examples:A building on fire. if you throw gazoline on it, it means your actions have a direct effect on the fire so you definitly are responsible for it.

But in a marriage, the third person's action has ZERO EFFECT if the one committed doesn't allow it. Emilia's actions have zero consequences on the marriage as long as the husband doesn't allow it. As soon as he does, Emilia's actions can have consequences.

You're talking about morals, being a good person,....that's not my point. I'm talking about the worst kind of person, someone who doesn't give a dam about others, who goes after what they want no matter who they hurt in the process. Well, in that case, even the actions of that person can have zero consequences on the marriage unless the one married is willing to participate, is allowing those actions to have consequences.The third person isn't responsible because wether their actions have consequences on the marriage or not isn't up to them, but up to the on married. That's why I don't consider them responsible for it at all. It doesn';t mean that their behavior is good, no...just that they aren't responsible for the destruction of the marriage.

reply

No matter how long your post is it misses the point.


Emilia isn't responsible for the destruction of the marriage at all. See, I'll take one of your examples:A building on fire. if you throw gazoline on it, it means your actions have a direct effect on the fire so you definitly are responsible for it.

But in a marriage, the third person's action has ZERO EFFECT if the one
committed doesn't allow it.


We have covered this.

That argument works in REVERSE just as well.

The HUSBANDS actions have ZERO effect if the THIRD PARTY trespasser does not allow it.

It works both ways. Logically, they are both accountable in that same way.


Emilia's actions have zero consequences on the marriage as long as the husband doesn't allow it. As soon as he does, Emilia's actions can have consequences.


The same goes for the husband. It logically works in both scenarios.


You're talking about morals, being a good person,....that's not my point. I'm talking about the worst kind of person, someone who doesn't give a dam about others, who goes after what they want no matter who they hurt in the process.


Emelia does not have to be a good person, she just has to walk away from being a BAD one. Instead she chose to jump right in.


Well, in that case, even the actions of that person can have zero consequences on the marriage unless the one married is willing to participate, is allowing those actions to have consequences.


It works both ways, as said before. If she shuts him down, the marriage is unaffected.

You make it sound like Emelia is some sort of idle mindless bowling pin he has to topple over. She is a willing agent in the act of marital damage here. An adult.


The third person isn't responsible because whether their actions have consequences on the marriage or not isn't up to them, but up to the on married.


Ethically no, she is responsible for her actions. She is ethically responsible for any damage she does. Again you make it sound like he is her parent here and anything SHE does is his fault by proxy.

If she were 10 I'd agree with you. She's a grown adult. Jack is accountable for his own behavior, and that of his son. Not that of a grown fully-informed adult woman.


That's why I don't consider them responsible for it at all. It doesn't mean that their behavior is good, no...just that they aren't responsible for the destruction of the marriage.


Logically that makes no sense. You are just asserting she's exonerate for not being married to Jack.

I am not married to everyone on the planet, but I still make every effort to respect them.

We are obligated morally to respect people here. Rings and marriage ceremonies don't determine who we must be respectful to and who we can step on. That's ridiculous. To take that route, any marriage is open season for any woman to meddle with.

Women are grown adults here. Not children who get to blame the man when they are making decisions and acting of their own accord.

He didn't seduce her. She chose to get involved here.

Sorry, exonerating people from blame simply because they didn't explicitly promise to act respectful gives everyone a green light to disrespect everyone else they didn't ceremonially promise to leave alone. lol

reply

No it doesn’t work both ways, because again, it’s the one’s committed choice that makes the difference. It’s up to the one committed wether the third person’s actions have consequences. Let me remind you that it takes only the one committed to destroy the marriage by simply giving their time and attentiuon to something or someone else ending up by leaving it, It doesn’t matter if there is a third person. No need for a third person in order to destroy a marriage but a third person definitely needs the one committed to participate ib order to have consequences for their actions. See, the one committed can decide to go after someone who’s not even interested in them, leaving the marriage.It doesn’t matter if they’d be successful at their quest. They decide to dump their partner to go after someone else regardless wether they’d be successful at it or not.The damaged is done without even the third person interfering. So no, it doesn’t work both ways.

Again I gave you the worst case scenario: A bad person who goes after what they want no matter who they hurt in the process. Well that person is still not responsible for the destruction of a marriage because they are totally powerless without the participation of the one married. Unless they force them into it.

Emilia is responsible for her actions but not for the destruction of a marriage because fact is, like it or not, it’s not up to her wether her actions have effects on a marriage.It’s up to the one married, whose actions can destroy their marriage even without a third person.

Well that sure proves that you’re missing the point. Emilia isn’t cheating on anyone since she’s not the one in a relationship or married.But that’s not the point.

You’re talking about respect. This goes with morals. Again my example gave you the worst case scenario, someone with no morals, and they still won’t be responsible for the destruction of a marriage., since they need the one married to participate.Unlike the one married who can destroy their marriage without a third person interfering.That totally falls on the one married.

Learn to read.

reply


No it doesn’t work both ways, because again, it’s the one’s committed choice that makes the difference.


Logically it does work both ways yes. If she tells him no, there's no affair.

Why on earth is it HIS choice if SHE cheats with him or not? lol

Logically no, it is THEIR choice. He chooses and she chooses.


It’s up to the one committed whether the third person’s actions have consequences.


Uh no... it's up to the people who act. If they chose to act, their actions have an effect. That's just basic physics now.

He acts, an effect happens. She acts, an effect happens. Unless they BOTH act, no affair happens. This is just physics 101.


Let me remind you that it takes only the one committed to destroy the marriage by simply giving their time and attention to something or someone else ending up by leaving it,


So what? lol Because Jack could trash his marriage without her help she's no longer culpable? lol

That's ridiculous.

I can rob a house on my own. That does not mean my accomplices are exonerated. If police arrive to make an arrest, they arrest BOTH criminals. lol


It doesn’t matter if there is a third person.


The fact that a marriage can fall apart without a third party's interference does not exonerate third parties from blame.

By that logic, if a house is a fire hazard, I can light it up and walk away without going to jail? lol

Again, this is just silly.


No need for a third person in order to destroy a marriage but a third person definitely needs the one committed to participate ib order to have consequences for their actions.


Not really no. A third person can trespass, infiltrate, and sabotage wtihout help if they want to. It's just easier if you have a man on the inside. Bank robbers use this strategy all the time. They don't need an inside man, but it does make it easier to loot the place.


See, the one committed can decide to go after someone who’s not even interested in them, leaving the marriage.


Again, the fact that Jack can be a jerk without Emelia's help does not exonerate Emelia for her behavior. HER behavior is hers. HIS behavior is HIS. You learn this stuff in first year law school, or in any course in Ethics at University. Heck parents teach their children this: when you act, that's your behavior. Finger pointing is a children's game.

We have been over this many times.


It doesn’t matter if they’d be successful at their quest. They decide to dump their partner to go after someone else regardless whether they’d be successful at it or not.The damaged is done without even the third person interfering. So no, it doesn’t work both ways.


If EITHER of them had said "no", the affair that DID take place, would NOT have taken place.

Could Jack have just found another woman with no integrity?

Yup.

Emelia could just have found another MARRIAGE to trash if Jack had told HER no.

Again, you fail to acknowledge Emelia as an adult, as an agent of change. She's not a child, or a pet. She's a grown adult. Legally she's fully accountable for her behavior.


Again I gave you the worst case scenario: A bad person who goes after what they want no matter who they hurt in the process. Well that person is still not responsible for the destruction of a marriage because they are totally powerless without the participation of the one married. Unless they force them into it.


And if he shuts her down, she just goes elsewhere to cause trouble. SHE is as much a problem as HE is.

We can do this all day, but the ethics of the situation are crystal clear here: she's an adult, and her behavior is her responsibility. Her bad behavior, her dishonest behavior, her destructive behavior is hers. She owns that.


Emilia is responsible for her actions but not for the destruction of a marriage


And now you contradict yourself. Her actions DID destroy a marriage. lol

SO, she is responsible for her actions that she took that led to marital destruction. Done and done.

As is Jack responsible for his actions that he took that led to the marital destruction.


because fact is, like it or not, it’s not up to her whether her actions have effects on a marriage.


Yes, her behavior is up to her. SHE, as a legal adult chooses. That is 100% up to her. THAT is again a fact.


It’s up to the one married, whose actions can destroy their marriage even without a third person.


The fact that I can rob, destroy, or hurt without help, does not exonerate my accomplices. lol

IF that were the case courts would try the ringleaders only, and let the rest of the criminals go free. lol


Well that sure proves that you’re missing the point. Emilia isn’t cheating on anyone since she’s not the one in a relationship or married.But that’s not the point.


And we have been over this. Emelia cheats Carolyn out of her TIME. EVERY MINUTE Jack and Emelia spend together is STOLEN GOODS. Those are minutes that belong to Carolyn. Emelia KNOWS she uses time promised to another. She just doesn't give a damn.


You’re talking about respect. This goes with morals. Again my example gave you the worst case scenario, someone with no morals, and they still won’t be responsible for the destruction of a marriage., since they need the one married to participate.


The fact that I cant' rob a bank without inside help does not exonerate me from criminal prosecution when I get caught. lol

Have you taken any courses in ethics or law? This is 101 stuff here.


Unlike the one married who can destroy their marriage without a third person interfering.That totally falls on the one married.


You can assert that all you want to, but that's all it is: an assertion.

Women who trespass into marriages rationalize like this all the time, and its ridiculous... almost comical.

Grown adults are ethically responsible for their behavior, bad or good. Emelia is no different in that respect. And her behavior is deplorable. As is Jack's.

reply

Simply because the third person’s actions can’t have any consequences on a marriage unless the one committed allows it.When all it takes is the one married’s action to destroy their marriage without even a third person. Not so hard to get

Your accomplices’s actions had direct effect on the situation , with or without you. Unlike in an affair where it takes the one married in order for the third person ‘s action to have consequences.

Stop comparing apples to oranges. A house can’t choose to be lit on fire or not, so your actions have consequences while a third person’s action have zero consequences without the married person’s consent.

A third person can trespass, infiltrate, and sabotage wihout help if they want to?. Translate that into an affair, it becomes rape. Again you can trespass, sabotage and infilatre something but not a marriage. All your manipulations have zero effect if the married one doesn’t participate, unless you force them into.

Again stop comparing apples to oranges. When you go after something, that something can’t choose to be taken or not. So you definitely are responsible.

But you can’t steal a person, unless it’s kidnapping, brainwashing, ..but definitly in a mutual consent in an affair. And you can’t have an affair unless the married one wants to. Your action have zero effect unless the married one allows it. While the married one can totally destroy their marriage without a third person.

My whole point is that it doesn’t work both ways because in both cases it takes the choice of the married one in order for the third person ‘s actions to affect the marriage or not. It’s the married one’s choice that destroys the marriage or not, no matter what the third person does.

And finally you wanna talk about laws:

The third person doesn't go to jail, or pay anything to the injured person.It's the one who was married who does. Why? Because unlike things who can't choose wether to be stolen, taken or damaged(so the responsibility falls completly on the one stealing,...them), people can.And someone who goes after a married person, may not have morals, but sure isn't the cause of the destruction of the marriage. The one who cheated is, since they're the one who violated their vows, committement.

reply


Simply because the third person’s actions can’t have any consequences on a marriage unless the one committed allows it.When all it takes is the one married’s action to destroy their marriage without even a third person. Not so hard to get


Consequences happen regardless of who allows them. Consequences happen from an agent who acts on an object. Its basic physics. We covered this already.


Your accomplices’s actions had direct effect on the situation , with or without you. Unlie in an affair where it takes the one married in order for the third person ‘s action to have consequences.


It takes two people to have an affair. Two willing participants who act against the safety of the marriage. TWO AGENTS who act upon it and produce adverse consequences. Emelia is not some mindless witness to this whole thing. She's a willing and active participant in the damage that's done.


Stop comparing apples to oranges. A house can’t choose to be lit on fire or not, so your actions have consequences while a third person’s action have zero consequences without the married person’s consent.


You don't get the analogy I made. Why am I not surprised.

Consent? lol You are worried about consent for consequences to happen?

Carolyn didn't consent... consequences happened there anyways now didn't they? lol

This is just silly now. You just keep asserting the same ridiculous claim.


A third person can trespass, infiltrate, and sabotage without help if they want to. Translate that into an affair, it becomes rape. Again you can trespass, sabotage and infilatre something but not a marriage. All your manipulations have zero effect if the married one doesn’t participate, unless yiu force them into.


You can't trespass into a marriage? LOL REALLY? lol

Emelia did a pretty damn good job of that now didn't she? LOL

More unsupported assertions... lol


Again stop comparing apples to oranges. When you go after something, that something can’t choose to be taen or not. So you definitely are responsible. But you can’t steal a person, unless it’s kidnapping, brainwashing, ..but definitlyb in a mutual consent in an affair. And you can’t have an affair unless the married one wants to. Your action have zero effect unless the married one allows it. Whjile the married one can totally destroy their marriage without a third person.


NO one said Jack didn't consent to the affair. This has nothing to do with Jack. We are discussing EMELIAS CHOICES. As a grown adult and agent of change. Jack DID allow her actions. They BOTH did a world of damage. That's blatantly obvious throughout the film they did a world of damage to a lot of people.


My whole point is that it doesn’t work both ways because in both cases it takes the choice of the married one in order for the third person ‘s axtions to affect the marriage or not. It’s the married one’ds choice that destroys the marriage or not, no matter what the third person does.


And Jack DID allow her to trash his marriage with him. So your point is what? That he allows it so that makes it OK? lol

We covered this nonsense already. It's absolute nonsense.


And finally you wanna talk about laws:



The third person doesn't go to jail, or pay anything to the injured person.It's the one who was married who does. Why? Because unlike things who can't choose whether to be stolen, taken or damaged(so the responsibility falls completely on the one stealing,...them), people can.And someone who goes after a married person, may not have morals, but sure isn't the cause of the destruction of the marriage. The one who cheated is, since they're the one who violated their vows, commitment.


No, that is not how alienation of affection laws work. You just keep repeating the same unsupported assertions...

Two people act in secret, two grown adults. Two choices made by two people. Two people responsible. It's just math.

reply

That's you problem, comparing things to people.

Things don't have a say on what happens to them while people do, especially when they have the choice.Your whole theory fails precisely because you treat people like 'something" and not people.

Again, the third person can't do anything if the married one isn't willing, without it being rape.But temptation is everywhere and it's up to the married one to either resist it or give into it destroying the marriage. Again, someone can unwillingly and unknowingly be a temptation. So if a married person decides to go after them despite of being married,or leaving the marriage, are you also gonna claim that the "third" person is responsible?No. It's all on the married one.Regardless of what the third person does, it has ZERO EFFECT, CONSEQUENCE on the marriage unless the married one allows it, in other words, cheats. And you can bring no law that says otherwise simply because unlike you, laws don't treat people like object that can be stolen. As victim of rape, blackmail,...?Sure. But when an affair happens willingly, the only one responsible for it's consequences on their marriage is the one married.

So try again.

reply


That's you problem, comparing things to people.

Things don't have a say on what happens to them while people do, especially when they have the choice.


OK, great to hear it. This includes Emelia then. Emelia has a say in what she does. Great!

What she said and chose to do is deceive Carolyn, sneak around with Caroyn's husband, and have sex with him in secret.

That was Emelia's "say" as people. lol


Your whole theory fails precisely because you treat people like 'something" and not people.


Exactly! Emelia AND Jack, by virtue of NOT giving Carolyn or William "a say" treats Carolyn and William like THINGS. lol

I didn't treat them like things, Jack AND EMELIA did. Jack AND EMELIA got a say, Carolyn and William didn't.

By virtue of your own argument... AGAIN case closed. lol


Again, the third person can't do anything if the married one isn't willing


And the married person can't do anything with Emelia either unless she's willing. Goes both ways. I have said this before.

You just keep REHASHING arguments that I have already refuted. lol


But temptation is everywhere and it's up to the married one to either resist it or give into it destroying the marriage.


Why on earth is the OTHER ADULT not expected to ACT like an adult?

You have this ridiculous idea that until you have a ring on your finger, you aren't morally accountable for your behavior.

You DO realize right, that people become ADULTS when they turn eighteen? NOT when they get a ring on their finger? lol


Again, someone can unwillingly and unknowingly be a temptation.


That's not the case here. Emelia knew what she was doing. We covered this. You are just rehashing refuted arguments.


So if a married person decides to go after them despite of being married,or leaving the marriage, are you also gonna claim that the "third" person is responsible?


The third party is responsible for THEIR behavior yes. As long as they aren't LIED to about the situation. The people LIED to in this scenario are Caroylyn and William.


No. It's all on the married one.Regardless of what the third person does,


You can assert that a hundred times if you want. That does not strengthen your argument. lol

I have refuted this already: Everyone is morally obligated to check their behavior, and take responsibility if they don't check their own behavior. Legal ADULTS are ALL accountable. NOT just married people. lol


it has ZERO EFFECT, CONSEQUENCE on the marriage unless the married one allows it,


And Jack hitting on Emelia has ZERO effect unless Emelia responds to it.

She did. At THAT point she's accountable for HER behavior.

Refuted AGAIN. READ what I write please. Don't just ignore it, ACKNOWLEDGE your arguments are falling flat here.


And you can bring no law that says otherwise simply because unlike you, laws don't treat people like object that can be stolen.


As I refuted earlier. Alienation of affection laws are on the books in several states in the USA, as well as other countries. You can SUE third parties for tampering with marriages. That IS the LAW, not me, the LAW.


But when an affair happens willingly, the only one responsible for it's consequences on their marriage is the one married.

So try again.


Asserting is NOT arguing. So YOU try again.

reply

The third person is responsible for their behavior, morals or lack of but can't destroy a marriage. Only the married one can, because the third person's behavior has zero effect on the marriage, no matter how much they try, as long as the married one remains faithful, unless they force them to.Again the third person isn't responsible for someone else's ,marriage. They can choose to respect it or not, they are responsible of their morals or lack of, but CAN'T destroy it, can't be responsible for it's destruction because the marriage is destroyed when the married one choose to cheat,not when the third person tries over and over...and fails.So it's the married one's choice that destroys the marriage.

reply

You can judge her for not respecting someone's marriage


And that is exactly what people on this forum are criticizing her for: disrespecting someone's marriage. Glad you concede this point finally.

but CAN'T destroy it [the marriage],


This is a straw man. No one here holds her fully accountable for the destruction of a marriage, only HER part of the damage SHE does.

And you have conceded that she took action and did damage already.

I have no idea why you are arguing pointless abstractions.

If two men beat a dog to death, one of them being the license holder of the dog, does it really matter who the owner is? lol

This is a pointless argument you make. BOTH Jack and Emelia have a lot of blood on their hands. I don't think anyone here cares about who put the final nail in the coffin.

Arguing about who gave who permission and who has the marriage license is just bullchit technicalities.

Emilia doesn't cause any damage. The married person's choice does. Because no matter what Emilia does, unless she forces him, she can't cause any damage without his consent.


This is a ridiculous abstraction.

She takes action, she does damage.

In no world do people need permission to cause damage. lol

People trash homes, families, and things all the time without ANY permission. lol

I have no idea what world you live in, but in the real world people don't need anyone else's consent to cause damage. lol

reply

No I didn't concide that she took actions that caused damages. Again, she could take all kind of actions, they won't cause any damage without the married one's decision. So she can't destroy a marriage no matter how much she tries to.Only the married one can, with their choices and decisions.

In order to damage houses, families,..with no permission, it's got to be by force: Kidnapping, rape, blackmail.... Not a consentual affair.

I know what world you live in: You try to blame the third person for your and your oartner's shortcomings when in fact the third person can't cause any damage, only your partner's choice can.

reply


No I didn't concide that she took actions that caused damages


You already admitted her actions are unethical, as a result of the damage she does yes.


. Again, she could tske all kind of actions, they won't cause any damage without the married one's decision. So she can't destroy a marriage no matter how much she tries to.Only the married one can, with their choices and decision.


IN what world does someone need consent from anyone to do damage? lol

And AGAIN you JUMP to destuction of marriage which is NOT what I am talking about.

I am addressing DAMAGE, not DESTRUCTION.

And Emelia clearly did damage. And clearly Jack DID consent so your point is MOOT. lol


In order to damage houses, families,..with no permission, it's got to be by force: Kidnapping, rape, blackmail.... Not a consentual affair.


No, one can do damage in SECRET without the need for ANY force at all. Burglars make a good living doing just that. lol

Man you just keep throwing around wild assumptions and I keep swating them away like flies. lol

I can take someone's dog by force, OR I can sneak into their home and walk out with it.. no force needed. lol

What world ARE you living in any way? lol


I know what world you live in: You try to blame the third person for your and your oartner's shortcomings when in fact the third person can't cause any damage, only your partner's choice can.


Choices don't do ANY damage, ACTIONS do. lol

AGAIN what world are you living in? lol

And when a person acts, there are ocnsequences. We teach TEN YEAR OLDS this. lol

I guess you missed that lesson?

reply

as a result of the damage she does yes.

I never said that so don't try to put words in my mouth. Her actions are unethical,she wants what another woman has, but she can't steal it, can't take it, can't cause any damage, unless it's by force. Only the married one 's decision can cause damages.


Again you can cause damages without someone's permission only by force. Not in a consentual affair.


Man you just keep throwing around wild assumptions and I keep swating them away like flies. lol

I can take someone's dog by force, OR I can sneak into their home and walk out with it.. no force needed. lol


Yes that's stealing, kidnapping, rape, blackmailing...forcing someone into it, someone who clearly doesn't want to. That can't be applied on a marriage and cheating in a consentual affair. So stop making a fool of yourself, you're not "swating" anything at all.

Of course when a person acts there are consequences. Except that no matter what a third person does, acts are in a consentual affair, their acts have zero consequences without the married person deciding to cheat, unless again the third person is forcing them, blackmailing them, raping them,kidnapping then...In that case it's not a consentual affair.In a consentual affair, the third person is powerless. It's the one married that holds the power and their decision is the one to either damage/destroy the marriage or save it.

reply

Except that no matter what a third person does, acts are in a consensual affair, their acts have zero consequences without the married person deciding to cheat,


And Jack DID cooperate with Emelia, so her actions had consequences. lol

So again what is your point? lol

reply

My point? Emilia isn't responsible for the damages or the destruction of the marriage. Only for her morals. Jack ,his decision, is what caused the damages and destruction of the marriage.Again Unless she forces him, she CAN'T create any damages no matter what she does, without his decision.His decision is what caused it.

reply

My point? Emilia isn't responsible for the damages or the destruction of the marriage. Only for her morals.


What the heck does "responsible for her .. morals " mean? lol


Jack ,his decision, is what caused the damages and destruction of the marriage.Again Unless she forces him, she CAN'T create any damages no matter what she does, without his decision.His decision is what caused it.


According to YOU yes. lol

What this amounts to is just childish blameshifting. lol

"HE started it" essentially, which is a children's game.

How old ARE you? lol

Is that your advice to Emelia when they get busted, just point at Jack and say "It's HIS fault, HE started it!!!" lol

All this typing you do, and all of it amounts to just passing blame onto Jack simply on the technicality of his name being on a marriage license. lol

You can point fingers all you want, but I don't think you convinced anyone here. lol

Everyone here pretty much unanimously holds Emelia accountable as a grown adult, who made bad choices and actions that did damage to a marriage.

Exonerating her as blameless because she isn't the one who is married is ridiculously childish.

I know ten year olds who show more maturity than that. lol

reply

You have some serious reading comprehension issues. I made my point very clear.Enough. Emilia has no morals, doesn't respect someone else's marriage but has zero effect on it .She isn't responsible for the damages or destruction of the marriage. Jack is.His decision is.I'll leave it at that.Enough.

reply

Emilia has no morals, doesn't respect someone else's marriage but has zero effect on it .She isn't responsible for the damages or destruction of the marriage. Jack is.His decision is.


More assertions with no evidence. I guess you never did look up the word assertion did you? lol

All you do is shift blame and drum up bull$hit technicalities.

Because Emelia's not on the marriage license, she's not morally accountable for ANY of the damage she does? lol

Emelia's a grown adult, not a twelve year old.

I don't think you have convinced anyone on this forum, despite all your typing. lol

You need more than assertions to convince people.

Everyone else, including myself, thinks Emelia's a piece of crap and is very much accountable as a grown adult.

It's a CRAZY world you must live in where grown adults can act as they please to disrespect anyone as long as they don't have a ring on their finger.

Apparently in your world people aren't accountable for their bad behavior until they get married, make a vow, or explicit promise to behave themselves.

reply

You have some serious reading problem.
Her choice doesn’t affect the marriage without his choice. While his choice affects the marriage without her choice. Sbe could have said no, he still decides to go after her, ruin his marriage instead of spending that time working on it. He still can choose to leave the marriage to go after someone who already told him no, thinking that he can change that. She can choose, decide anything, it won’t destroy, affect the marriage in any way without the husband’s choice. Unlike him, who can destroy his marriage even if she tells him no. So he is THE ONLY responsible for the destruction of his marriage. Her choices lack of morals, respect…but can’t destroy a marriage since she’s not the one married.Unless she forces him.

She acts, her act have zero effect if he doesn’t act. While he acts and his actions have devastating consequences even if she doesn’t act.Try something else.

Stop comparing things to people. A person can’t be stolen while things can. A person can choose to wether cheat or not while a thing can’t choose wether to be stolen or not. A third person’s action have zero consequence if the married one doesn’t allow it. While your accomplices’s actions have a direct effect on the thing you’re stealing. They can steal with or without you, but a third person can’t do a thing without the married one allowing it.Their actions have a direct effect on the situation so they are held responsible, since the thing can't say"no I don't want to be stolen" While the third person's actions have zero effect on the marriage unless the married one allows it, so they are not responsible for the destruction of marriage, unless she forces him.

Repeating yourself trying to convince yourself comparing apples to oranges. Emilia could have said no, he still decides to go after her, he’s already having an emotional affair with her.The affair isn’t only physical. She could reject him, he still decides to go after her, he’s all into her, even if she’s not. There you have the emotional affair without the third party participating.

That’s my whole point. Whatever the third person decides to do shows their morals but isn’t responsible for the destruction of the marriage. The married one is




reply

You are just repeating the same assertions and the same argument.

Have you got anything OTHER than this? Because I have refuted all of this already:

a. Because Jack gives Emelia the green light to trespass, Emelia is no longer accountable for her bad behavior.

Counter-argument: Emelia's a grown adult. Of course she is accountable for her behavior. Parents teach TEN YEAR OLDS this logic. You don't get to blame others for your bad behavior. Ten year old children understand this.

b. Jack participates in a ceremony and promises to love and honor Carolyn. Because Emelia did not make that promise, Emelia is ethically free to trespass, infiltrate, and sabotage Jack and Carolyn's marriage in secret.

Counter-argument: The absence of a promise to love and honor someone does not exonerate someone from accountability when they harm people. From your logic, a person can murder someone and walk away from it as long as they never promised to love them beforehand.

c. Jack could chose another female to commit infidelity with. Therefore, Emelia is no longer responsible for her bad behavior.

c. Jack could have chosen another third party trespasser, yes. Emelia could have chosen another married man. The fact that either of them had other choices to make does not exonerate them from culpability for the choices they did make. Again, back to A, they are both adults.

You have typed for pages here but that's what you assert/argue. You just put different spins on it.


Have you ever heard of the term alienation of affection? It's a legal concept and is actively used in a few courts in USA, as well as elsewhere.

That law basically allows a betrayed spouse to Legally SUE a third party for interloping into their marriage in secret. It's actively used in North Carolina.

You should be aware what you are arguing would not stand up in any court. Grown adults dont' get to blame others for their bad behavior. If you participate in an act of harm, you are legally culpable.



You aren't going to convince me, or anyone else here, that a grown adult woman is not held to the same standards of ethics we hold ten year old children to. That's just ridiculous.

reply

You're not gonna convince me either because your so called laws actually supports me since the one paying for the damages in a marriage at a divorce is the one who cheated and was married. Not the third person. Why? Simply because they are the ones responsible for their marriage, and only their choices and decisions can either save or destroy a marriage, the ones who disrespected their vows. The third person is powerless without the married one's choice

reply


You're not gonna convince me either because your so called laws actually supports me since the one paying for the damages in a marriage at a divorce is the one who cheated and was married.


They are in New York. New York has no fault divorce there silly. lol

NO ONE pays damages in New York. Divorce is no fault, just like California.

SOME states are fault states, and others are no fault.

So, no, the law does not support you. Geography does. lol


Not the third person. Why? Simply because they are the ones responsible for their marriage,


Jesus how many times are you gonna parrot the same *beep* assertion with NO support behind the position?

You just look sillier with each post.


and only their choices and decisions can either save or destroy a marriage, the ones who disrespected their vows. The third person is powerless without the married one's choice


All of this has nothing to do with Emelia's behavior. I am addressing Emelia's choices, her behavior, and the damage that she does.

You haven't refuted that point yet. You just keep shifting the discussion onto the marriage and blaming Jack for everything. lol

As legal adults, they are both accountable for their behavior, morally speaking. In several states in the USA Emelia would be sued, and even go to jail.

I am all for seeing her behind bars.

reply

All of this has nothing to do with Emelia's behavior. I am addressing Emelia's choices, her behavior, and the damage that she does.

You haven't refuted that point yet. You just keep shifting the discussion onto the marriage and blaming Jack for everything. lol

As legal adults, they are both accountable for their behavior, morally speaking. In several states in the USA Emelia would be sued, and even go to jail.

I am all for seeing her behind bars.


Of course I refuted it. Emilia doesn't cause any damage. The married person's choice does. Because no matter what Emilia does, unless she forces him, she can't cause any damage without his consent.

In no state Emilia would go to trial for dating a married man, unless she's doing it over and over again as a buisness, in order to steal their money,or something.You'll never see a single woman or a single man going to jail, or even to trial for dating a married person. But a married person can definitly go to trial and even to jail since they cheated, didn't respect their committement, contract,vows,....

reply

You have some serious reading comprehension issues

Emilia is responsible for her behavior, you can judge her for her morals,or lack of,...but you sure can't claim that she is responsible for the destruction of the marriage. She is not responsible for someone else's marriage respect of vows, committement.... You can judge her for not respecting someone's marriage(her morals) but can't make her responsible for it's destruction, since she can't destroy it. Only the married one can, unless she forces him. And that's my whole point.

reply