Re: I've got a topic for discussion...

Rager93 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>I draw distinction between "cheating" and "adultery".  I think the law
>does as well.  See for me once a person decides to go outside the
>mariage for companionship they have in essence "cheated".  Acting on it
>is where one crosses into adultery.  Cheating starts with the thought.

I agree. This would be where Loren's opinion comes into play... I guess if
you're involved in a purely sexual relationship, it would be different, but when
you are involved emotionally with someone, there's emotional betrayal as well,
which is what happens when you start contemplating these sorts of things.

>To be completely honest, my relationships with certain female members
>of this newsgroup is still an "issue" between me and my wife.  Have I
>cheated?  Certainly not in my mind.   
>
>My wife asks about Shaye and Rox specifically, and what I get through
>my correspondence with them.  Not an unfair question in and of itself. 
>My reply is that I get the same thing from them as I do from Brent,
>Britt, Bryant, Greg, Synthuser, Johan, Chris Tidwell, and ever yother
>male person I've had personal contact with through the newgroups or
>e-mail:  Friendship, commraderie and a common love for a particular
>type of music.  

Wow. To me, you're all friends and I would never consider my corresepondence
with anyone from here anything close to cheating. But...

>She doesn't get the whole "newgroup/internet thing" to begin with and
>would be insecure about me cultivating relationships with women period. 
>That's her nature.  I understand it and we deal with it.

I can understand that point of view to an extent.

>> I'm sure we could find a way to tie this in to Queensrÿche if we tried, but
>> I'll
>> leave that up to y'all.
>
>Well I tied it into my personal experience in the Queensryche
>newsgroup.  I think that qualifies it as On Topic. ;-)

lol, but do we really care if it isn't? :)

>> Looking forward to hearing your answers, which will probably be more exciting
>> and less one-sided than the Falcons-Giants game will be.
>
>Well the game was definitely one-sided....but somehow I think you were
>way more excited about the game. ;-)

lol, you could say that. :)  Tho the Giants seem to want to say they just sucked
and not because of anything the Falcons did, I think the Falcons played well.
They certainly capitalized on some Giants' mistakes, but they managed to put
together two halfs in the same game where they didn't fall apart for the first
time in 2 months. If they'd played like they did Sunday all year, we might be
around .500.

Anyway, it's interesting to see how very similar everyone's opinions are... I've
seen some articles on internet "cheating" of all sorts over the past few years,
and it's apparently becoming rather prevalent for people to answer online
personals or visit flirty chatrooms or have "cybersex." I would guess it's just
the temptation of having "other" so readily available added to the idea you
won't get caught that lures so many more people in. 

Shaye