IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / News Picks Forum / does an adulterer have an expectation of privacy?
Post #275,073
by boxley
12/7/06 12:20:26 PM
Reply
New does an adulterer have an expectation of privacy?
especially if he is a public figure?
[link|http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/05/nban05.xml|http://www.telegraph.../12/05/nban05.xml]
A cuckolded husband was banned by the High Court yesterday from naming a married public figure who conducted an affair with his wife.
In what is believed to be the first case of its kind, Mr Justice Eady granted the adulterer \ufffd who may be identified only as CC \ufffd an injunction against the betrayed husband, referred to as AB.
as a social construct I dont really give a shit but in the case of a public figure should he be protected? Not that it wouldnt be splattered all over the web before he had time to call a lawyer but thats a different issue.
thanx
bill

Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep

reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
Post #275,092
by warmachine
12/7/06 6:50:50 PM
12/8/06 2:44:17 AM
Reply
New Yes, unless he rants on about family values
An affair does not suggest a politician is not working in the nation's best interests, so it's none of the public's business. If the politician lectures on about family values or the like, he's a hypocrite and the public need to know that. Hypocrisy heavily damaged the Conservative party in the UK when they were in power.

[edit]Can't believe I answered no to the question when my explanation meant yes.
Matthew Greet


Choose Life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family. Choose a fucking big television, choose washing machines, cars, compact disc players and electrical tin openers. Choose good health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choose fixed interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose your friends. Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose DIY and wondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing game shows, stuffing fucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the end of it all, pishing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fucked up brats you spawned to replace yourself. Choose your future. Choose life... But why would I want to do a thing like that? I chose not to choose life. I chose somethin' else. And the reasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when you've got heroin?
- Mark Renton, Trainspotting.
Expand Edited by warmachine Dec. 8, 2006, 02:44:17 AM EST
Expand All History
Post #275,130
by pwhysall
Picture of pwhysall
12/8/06 1:30:23 AM
Reply
New Re: Not unless he rants on about family values
Hypocrisy heavily damages the Conservative party in the UK. when they were in power.

There.

I think that's what you meant to say when you were thinking of Mr "I'm Flying To Norway To Look At The Melting Glaciers" Cameron.

Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
Post #275,105
by ubernostrum
12/7/06 10:12:37 PM
Reply
New No.

In this case, the right to privacy does not include the right to escape the consequences of your actions, some of which, for a public figure, likely include public exposure.

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
Post #275,151
by xtensive
Picture of xtensive
12/8/06 10:33:41 AM
Reply
New Hell no
The very nature of an affair is that your belying the trust of your spouse - whether or not you're preaching family values.

I want to know the good the bad and the ugly. I don't believe anyone is pure, by any means, some "infractions" are less important than others to me. But if you're going to run to represent the "good of the people," then I want to know how bad you are and I'll determine whether your wrongs outweight your rights.

'Cause me, personally, I think cheating on your spouse is low. I'm all for a sex-positive culture if both partners are into it, but sneaking around behind his/her back? Me no think so.
"I'm man enough to tell you that I can't put my finger on
exactly what my philosophy is now, but I'm flexible."
-- Malcolm X
Post #275,167
by bepatient
Picture of bepatient
12/8/06 12:38:59 PM
Reply
New No. This is clearly influence peddling.
As the courts have very often held that it is the nature of their selection of public life that limits some of their privacy protections. He should NOT be barred from telling everyone ACCURATE AND TRUE information about someone else, ever.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
     does an adulterer have an expectation of privacy? - (boxley) - (5) - Dec. 7, 2006, 12:20:26 PM EST
         Yes, unless he rants on about family values - (warmachine) - (1) - Dec. 8, 2006, 02:44:17 AM EST
             Re: Not unless he rants on about family values - (pwhysall) - Dec. 8, 2006, 01:30:23 AM EST
         No. - (ubernostrum) - Dec. 7, 2006, 10:12:37 PM EST
         Hell no - (xtensive) - Dec. 8, 2006, 10:33:41 AM EST
         No. This is clearly influence peddling. - (bepatient) - Dec. 8, 2006, 12:38:59 PM EST

bash#_
56 ms