enjoy a future full of postmenopausal women with scoliosis wyrm...i tried to save you...

*straps a fifteen year old girl to his face, rides off on a horse drawn carriage. the carriage is named The Whispering Drapes.*

I would only feel bad, if I thought I was doing something wrong, but I don't think that. Now I have to agree with you on something, if the person who was engaged was actually my friend or something and I KNEW he thinks having sex with others is wrong, and is doing it merely because he's horny/drunk/whatever, then I wouldn't do it, but the times I've done it, it has been with people I don't really know their moral code, so I just ASSUME the have no problem with it either.

But its not about everyone having a different relativeistic moral code. Its about testing the maxim that you should treat others with the consideration and compassion that you want to be treated with. I don't think that if you go and have sex with someone's girlfriend or wife, that consideration of or compassion for that someone is the foremost thing on your mind.

uhhhh HELLO morals are relative there's nothing wrong with extramarital affairs. humans are the only animals with the 'institution' of marriage and i think in this case you need to look no further than the old maxim "finders keepers, losers weepers"

the only one who should feel bad is the woman for selling herself to a man before trying out the buffet

edit: Warning! While you were making this post...

but morals are not relative they are absolute by maxims of reciprocity and intent. ethics and customs are relative, and its true that different cultures have different ideas about sex and gender and relationships, but that doesn't deny the fact that you should treat others how you want to be treated

morals are relative and always will be but certain aspects of morality have to be in place for society to hold together.

in my own relativist decency standards, I would never break up a relationship just to get my fuck on and can't really fathom a good reason as to why you would.

well we are straying into the objectivist/subjectivist thing which philosophers have not answered for thousands of years but I think we can all agree that boning for the sake of boning with someone who is off the market is generally not a good idea

As I said already, if my bf had sex with someone else, I could care less, so I DO treat others the same way I would want they to treat me, I don't do stuff I consider bad to other people, but if I don't find it's wrong, there's no problem, there are loads of people who think extramarital SEX is allright, and I think we're all grownups and have to take care of ourselves.

Marriage has become a financial institution.

Edit:

I am pro you fucking her mainly because she needs to realise that marrying that guy is not for her if she wants to do that!

steel you say that as if having sex with someone in a relationship would automatically dissolve the relationship. what if they are in an open relationship of sorts, or it is made very clear that there will never be a relationship between you two beyond sex and only under certain circumstances (like the other person is away for months/years and they just want to get a laid)

i didn't say automatically, but it's pretty likely that fucking around isn't cool with your partner especially if you haven't discussed it. if you have an open relationship, mazel tov although I've never met one of those where it wasn't a guy dragging around a desperate girl who hopes one day...they'll be together... but saying ITS JUST SEX and not having discussed that with your partner? not cool. sexuality still has a degree of intimacy for most people and betraying that tends to upset most folks.

You sir, are a home wrecker in the making, adding to the spiraling abysmal of a thing we can call society today.

she's only ever had sex with her fiance and now wyrm

All I have to say is, if you're going to do it again, do it on her wedding day. You would be the coolest guy ever if you could say that you had sex with a girl on her wedding day.

but morals are not relative they are absolute by maxims of reciprocity and intent. ethics and customs are relative, and its true that different cultures have different ideas about sex and gender and relationships, but that doesn't deny the fact that you should treat others how you want to be treated

what?? treating others the way you want to be treated is a moral, so yeah moral relativism does change that!
made absolute by maxims of reciprocity and intent <- this is garbage what do you even mean, if morals were the best thing to do for the individual then we wouldn't need them because everyone would behave that way anyway

yeah obviously in this case she never talked it over with her fiancee and thats not the case here at all, im just saying in general if it has been discussed and agreed that it's ok to have casual sex but not any other form of relationship would you do her then??

well I'm not a big fan of the casual sex. lord save me from the casual sex. I know myself well enough to know that if I want to have sex with someone chances are it's because of something beyond their looks so if I knew there was no chance of a relationship I don't know if I'd bother to put both her and I through that because I'm relatively charming and if someone wanted to fuck me it certainly wouldn't be because of my looks.

so basically every casual sex situation I've been in was resultant from my having a non-casual sex appeal! ask bort hes quite the handsome devil.

Holy shit has this conversation gotten convoluted and pretentious or what?

Fucking people in relationships is fucked up and people fucking people when they're in a committed relationship is also fucked up. End of story!

what?? treating others the way you want to be treated is a moral, so yeah moral relativism does change that!
made absolute by maxims of reciprocity and intent <- this is garbage what do you even mean, if morals were the best thing to do for the individual then we wouldn't need them because everyone would behave that way anyway

The idea that there is a maxim of morality (for example, do unto others) negates the idea of moral relativism, if you agree with it, which I do. Like I said, while ethics continue to be relativistic (based on circumstance) intent and accountable judgement of reciprocity (both of which transcend circumstance but still apply to the individual) are clearer indicators of the morality of an action.

But if you're a relativist by philosophy you are also equally entitled to that opinion.

Holy shit has this conversation gotten convoluted and pretentious or what?

Fucking people in relationships is fucked up and people fucking people when they're in a committed relationship is also fucked up. End of story!

I'm glad we can have an adult debate in here. =)

maxims like the golden rule don't make morals absolute because Jimbo Jobs might have the silver rule: cash rules everything around me, C.R.E.A.M get the money, dollar dollar bill yall