'Live-in acceptable, why not adultery?'

 @

Can any legal mind here be in a position to realy go this far as in things to come handy as in The Form, if yes then save it right away in that special Files Folder which some of you talk sometimes about J


                                         Sexual Consent Form Agreement
                                                              &
                                                 Right to Privacy

I, ________________________________, hereby declare under penalty of perjury

that I am over 18 years old.

I, further declare that this agreement is of my own free will and that neither I nor

anyone near or dear to me has been threatened with harm or embarrassment.

Both parties agree that this is a private agreement not to be disclosed to third

parties except in case of accusation of s*xual misconduct of present Law by the agreeing party. If he / she shows or makes public this agreement without accusation of s*xual misconduct, it is agreed that he / she will be liable for damages for invasion of privacy.

By initialing, __________________ I agree to engage in all or some of the following consensual acts.

-  Sexual fondling and kissing.

-  Oral copulation (mutual).

 - Oral copulation (unilateral) by _____________________ only (initial with full given name) only.

-  Sexual intercourse with only a WCD / NCW and or MCI approved condom at all times (whichever early available in nearest convenio store).

Other consensual s*xual conduct to be specified medico terminology as point wise:

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

I further declare that I am at this time not under the influence of alcohol, drugs,

Medication or hypnotized by any person be it by self and agree to engage in consensual s*x with:_____________________________(initial with full name)

At this time I do not intend to change my mind before the s*x act or acts are over.

However, if I do, it is further understood that when I say the words “CODE RED” my

partner agrees to STOP INSTANTLY!

Signed: _________________________ Date: ____________ Place:___________

Signed: _________________________ Date: ____________ Place:___________

 

2011 © The Indian in larger ‘public interest’ of things to carry forward

If right to have s*x with anyone is so important,DON'T get married AT ALL...

This is like saying " if you are fearful of food poisoning everytime you eat, don't eat at all". Or shall I say, Don't throw the baby with bath water.

Family is the basic unit of the society and the institution of marriage is absolutely necessary for a healthy society. When the man or woman goes for extra-marital s*x, it only implies absence of love, faith and trust between the couple and that is indicative of collapse of the marriage. Of course, those who are incapable of love, faith and trust should never marry. But all others should.

Having s*x outside marriage will hurt the partner's feelings... Getting partner's consent to have s*x outside marriage will devastate him,if you ask for it.. Remain a bachelor/spinster,if you cannot commit to 1 person.

For once, I agree with you on these statements.

SIMPLE............THAT'S IT.

Nothing in this world is that simple. There is interplay of several factors. But those with tunnel vision may not see all factors.

One has the right to have tunnel vision too!

PS: Using all-capital format and using super-big font size are equivalents of shouting in net parlance. I hope you were not shouting at me.

Now who wrote this in a big fonts????Anyway who they are doesnt matter what matter is this:

A real time relationsship

Anyway In any life form, there is a balance between competition and cooperations. As human beings, we know that the division of labor and the benefit and amount of productivity that comes with doing this is of immense benefit; we know that in order to get somebody to enter into an economic transaction with us without the use of the force, we have to offer them something not only that they want but something that they value more highly than whatever it is we want out of the trade. I believe this in our romantic, friend and our familial relationships, we need to demand the same of ourselves and of the people with whom we associate.

Ask yourself how often you look at a statist and think, how do they not see that these things are harmful to their well-being and also hurt those around them? Why in the world would any rational person accept the sort of abuse that comes from this coercive mechanism in which you have no say as to whether or not you are interested in buying, or whether you are interested in selling, as in eminent domain? How in the world has nearly the whole of humanity decided that instead of having love and respect for one another, we should constantly have ourselves split divisively by theft, by being told you may not enter into what voluntary associations that you will, by being told that your idea for a product is unsafe, by having it adjucated that your feeling of anxiety or injustice are illegitimate when done a disservice by either the State or the corporations with whom they are in cohorts? How did we get into this sad affair and why do people continue accepting it?

Now, again, I ask yourself to look around at the personal relationships that you involve yourself in. When you are in a conversation with your parents or any of your loved ones, it is important to make sure that when they voice a complaint you give that completely autonomous person the respect and thought that they deserve because their feelings are not invalid, and you should ask the same of all of those that you associate with. Why? Because we learn to accept our place in the world through not the completely abstract notion of the state but in our day-to-day doings.

I wrote big fonts in an imposing tone,that this is my final word,so as to end this argument forever. This issue has been discussed multiple times in LCI in different threads,where I always said that a person who cannot commit to 1 person shud never marry.i was tired of this argument...so talked BIG FONTS.

I did not think of you while writing the above post.It was directed to Arup.

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................

Okay coming to ur repliy to me above.................. on one hand you say u agree wid me that a person incapable of committment shud not marry.on the other hand in ur starting lines u express differing views,by citing egs. of baby,bath tub,food poisoning etc.Ironically i had said the same thing in my starting line also to which u replied thru these egs. of baby& tub..

why these dual replies??????

...................................................................................................................................................................................................

u also replied pointwise to my questions earlier

i will only say that whether one is a husband/wife,or an employee,or a son/daughter.....once he takes up a responsible role...he shud abide by it....else never marry(if he's a spouse to sum1)

with constitutional rights also come duties...

if a person finds marriage suffocating and wants to experiment lovemaking with diff. people...he's a lustful person....

there are happily married couples too.......in media also like dilip kumar,rishi kapoor,etc.....

committment is a b'ful feeling...dont u feel gud wen ur friend,parent,partner,employee,etc serves u wid committment...

isnt committment gud for mental health,stablelife,for remaing settled in family life????

if people have designed institution of marriage in india,there are genuine reasons.....

those who equate love with s*x are animals...once these animals grow old and their libido dies out...they have a hard time finding a devoted partner...either because of over age or because their promiscuous character is known beforehand to the prospective partner,who of course rejects him...

after all,people also do background check before marrying these days...

so such a person spends his life alone,in misery wid no one to look after him in old age,and regrets breaking his 1st marriage because of lust for other men/women....

choice is urs!!!!

Ms. Roshni,

you wrote:

Okay coming to ur repliy to me above.................. on one hand you say u agree wid me that a person incapable of committment shud not marry.on the other hand in ur starting lines u express differing views,by citing egs. of baby,bath tub,food poisoning etc.Ironically i had said the same thing in my starting line also to which u replied thru these egs. of baby& tub..

why these dual replies??????

There is no contradiction in my reply. I am a family man and as I mentioned earlier I agree with your remark that a person who is unable to make long-term commitment to his family (wife, children, parents) should not marry.  My views on Sec. 497 has nothing to do with this firm belief.

Sec. 497 is operative when there is deviation from the long-term commitment a person makes - be it the husband or the wife. The difference of opinion between us  is only about how to treat such abberrations. You seem to think that punishment prescribd by 497 is needed. In my opinion, Section 497 is obnoxious. I have given my reasons in detail for thinking so but I will summarise briefly to save your time reading back.

1. Sec 497 punishes after the event and has no deterrent value. Adultery is breach of trust in a marriage and therefore annullment of marriage is the only thing that is called for and this is already provided by other laws. So what 497 seek to achieve?

2. If a married woman indulges in adultery, she is not punished. In an act in which both man and wife are equal partners, why only one party is punished?

3. Worst of all, it decrinalizes adultery when the wife indulges in extra-marital s*x 'with the consent of her husband'. Don't you see the dehumanising insinuation against all females in this section? This section equates wives with chattel (NOT my view, I repeat and that is why I object to this section).  

I don't see any contradiction in believing in strong family ties and the demand for removing Sec. 497 from IPC.

If you still see contradition in my views, there must be something seriously wrong with the way I write English or your understanding of the language.

Either way, I have nothing more to say in this matter. I am exhausted repeating the same thing again and again.

If right to have s*x with anyone is so important,DON'T get married AT ALL...

- undoubtedly society moving towards it.

@Arup

Its true that " undoubtedly society moving towards it."

" When the man or woman goes for extra-marital s*x, it only implies absence of love, faith and trust between the couple and that is indicative of collapse of the marriage. Of course, those who are incapable of love, faith and trust should never marry. But all others should."

- 's*x' &  'love, faith trust' are two diffrent thing.

s*x is animal instinct whereas love, faith, trust are social instinct.

" those who are incapable of love, faith and trust should never marry"

- A person, who is capable of love, faith and trust may or may not do s*x. it is not that s*x & love-faith-trust, are diffrent and oppose one other.

- Actually, i am imagining such a society, where marriage will considered as a topic of history. As on day, we study the slaveism is a matter of history.

- today we question, why a fellow men will be treated as slave of a fellow men? Tomorrow people will think how thethen people tolarate one person as a matrimonial slave of other person.

- They will do research on it.

I remember two chanakya quote;

He whose son is obedient to him, whose wife's conduct is in accordance with his wishes, and who is content with his riches, has his heaven here on earth.

Separation from the wife, disgrace from one's own people, an enemy saved in battle, service to a wicked king, poverty, and a mismanaged assembly: these six kinds of evils, if afflicting a person, burn him even without fire.

Adultery is dangerous opposite to live in.

As in adultery the spouse who feels cheated may get harmed or harm the cheating spouse. In most of the instance its the husband and children who get harmed due to adulteress woman. https://lifenstory.com/male_victims_of_adultery