If a person has sex with someone they know is in a relationship, are they just as bad as the cheater? How 'bad' are they?

Yes, they have some guilt.

They are violating relationship boundaries.

They are equally guilty, assuming they were fully aware of the relationship. That includes when the person in the relationship has told them that they are miserable with their s/o, because I’m 99% sure that most people say that when they are cheating. I would guess that’s why they’re cheating in the first place, in many cases.

Personally, I believe they are crossing very clear boundaries and as such are just as guilty.

I guess I disagree with those above. They may be a bit selfish for going through with it, but it’s not their responsibility to say no if both parties are willing. It’s not their relationship, they have no obligations to the other persons boyfriend, girlfriend, wife, husband, whatever.

If the person doing the cheating is sincerely unhappy, then maybe they shouldn’t be in the relationship in the first place. If they’re happy and cheating just for the hell of it, well that sucks, but I don’t think blame should be placed on the person they’re cheating with.

I defer to the wise and distinguished gentlemen of the O’Jays… “What they do”?

I once had a a tryst with a woman who was living with someone. She was very unhappy with the relationship, and I felt I was giving her an option to leave.
When she did leave, I needed to make a choice between her, and the woman I eventually married. One of the reasons I didn’t pick her was that I knew she would fool around on someone she lived with (it didn’t matter that she had done it with me!).
So I felt guilt free, but also have always cared about that one who could have been…

A person who has sex with someone who is in a relationship is selfish, impatient and has no respect for the feelings of those they are hurting.

Not good qualities to have. imo

The best moral compass I have come across so far is the categorical imperative:

“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.”

I would not will that it should become a universal law for someone to participate in cheating. So I don’t think it’s morally defensible.

I don’t think they’re as bad as the actual ‘cheater’, simply because the third party is not betraying a loved one’s trust. That said, it’s still way wrong, and if you do it, you shouldn’t have a clear conscience about it. Just not quite as bad.

it depends if both of them come

Yes, if you fool around with a married person knowing they’re married then you are just as accountable.

Yes. If you are single and fool around with a married person you are violating a trust.
If both people are married, then that’s a different case altogether.

What does integrity mean? Is it possible to do the things you describe and live with integrity? I doubt it.

Yeah, they both suck.

They share the ignominy of dishonesty.

Yes

If they’ll cheat with you, they’ll cheat on you . . .

Hmm, I’m in the minority here. I think the person in the relationship is far more guilty than the other participant. The single person just sees an opportunity to have sex and could give two shits about the cheater’s personal life. The married one is the one with issues of violating trust. That person is going to find someone to have sex with. The other one figures he/she might as well be the lucky one.

This is assuming the single one is just viewing this as casual sex and isn’t good friends with the cheated. If they are friends, then both are violating that person’s trust.

If the cheater leaves his/her spouse for a relationship with the single person, I still think the cheater committed the greater crime. From the single person’s perspective, all’s fair in love and war.

But the single person would be foolish to enter a supposedly loving relationship with someone who left a spouse.

@cockswain I believe the person in the relationship is more guilty, that’s for sure, but it still doesn’t say much about the homewrecker person who is going after the married/taken person.

I don’t think blame helps anyone in any of these situations one bit, so I refuse to assign blame. If ya’ll wanted to do something useful, you’d try to understand what motivates these behaviors, and what problems people have, and then figure out ways to address those problems. But assigning blame? I’m sorry, but that puts you all in the first circle of hell as far as I’m concerned.

I think it’s a Christian thing—something about casting the first stone only if you have no sin.

We need more empathy, not more blame.

@jonsblond Sure, I won’t take the position that the homewrecker is a saint. But you could argue the cheater simply by having the motivation to cheat has already ruined the relationship to very little value. So the homewrecker really isn’t even screwing things up that much worse at that point.

I certainly don’t have passionate feelings about it one way or another.

In some cases I believe the home wrecker can be worse. Married couples go through up and downs and yes the married person should hold most of the blame because they are the one that made the vow, but some people become very vunerable to outside influence when they feel lost and confused. In that case, if a single person uses this vunerability to their advantage than they aren’t only guilty of trying to destroy a marriage but they are manipulators as well. Such a person is scum. They are only concerned with what they need and dam everyone else.
Now if the married person is the manipulator, than I can see where the home wrecker may not be such a bad person. Its always possible that it swings the other way.
If they both are willing participants and neither was manipulated and both went into it eyes wide open, than they both should share the guilt of being selfish low lifes.

Homewrecker.

I would personally have horrible guilt. I would feel disgusted with my lack of empathy for whoever I was hurting. I would feel that I was disrespecting myself and the woman whose relationship I was ruining. I would question my will and my self-esteem.

I was once unknowingly dating someone who was cheating on his girlfriend. I felt all of these things, plus, overwhelmingly, stupidity. How could I not know? Why did I let my naivety hurt someone? Sure, I wasn’t guilty in the traditional sense. But I was guilty in the emotional sense.

There could be a lot of things going on between any three given people. In this hypothetical question, it’s easy to assign guilt, but in real life things could be more complicated and there could be two sides to the story. So I’m not going to judge any of them.

While the “other” person certainly wouldn’t win any awards for integrity, i think the onus is firmly in the hands of the cheating partner to protect and preserve the relationship. I disagree with the idea that the ‘other’ person holds equal responsibility because they made no oath of loyalty to anyone so they aren’t bound to them. The other person can’t force them to be infidels, the cheater gives in willingly and that’s on their head alone.

Just because someone takes the opportunity to toast some smores on a raging brushfire doesn’t mean that it’s their fault the fire started in the first place.

IMO the only thing they are guilty of is having a mutually enjoyable time together. The married person or the person in the relationship has their cross to bear.

IMO, they are 100% responsible for their actions. If they knew the someone they got into things with already has a special someone, then said person is 100% responsible for his/her actions in this situation.

The person in the relationship is 100% responsible for his/her own cheating, as well.

Essentialism, essentialism, essentialism, morality, morality, morality.

It’s relative (contextual/ situational/dependent on the details, not inherent), unless it involves relatives in which case; yes, it is bad. Is ‘cheating’ bad? Probably, I guess. I mean that too is not so easily essentialized.

Is the person who enables/seduces someone in a relationship to cease their monogamy, responsible for that person? No. We are responsible for ourselves, and our children as they are of ourselves. I think we can be said to be responsible to all of those we love, because our love is of ourselves.

How messed up is that? Well, “up” I don’t know about, but mess? Yes, it is messy, I agree.

I think morally it’s wrong for an individual to sleep with somebody
that they are aware is in a relationship with somebody else
but I also think that they’re not the one in the relationship…...
So ultimately, though it’s not a very nice thing to do, I would place the blame
more so on the individual that is actually in the relationship.

Having been cheated on, my rational has always been ” so and so is my boyfriend, and the other female has no obligation to me aside from maybe just being a decent human being, and though I personally think it’s inconsiderate of the female-she is not my girlfriend…
and my dissapointment would reside almost entirely with the cheater. ,,this is with the assumption that the third party wasn’t neccessarily romping around with the intent of “wrecking someones home”, and the relations happened in a more complex way

I suppose this is a complicated question. ha.

I realize marriage is a bit more extreme than dating, but I feel that my opinion would translate the same.

I think in a typically monogamous society, the person cheated on would be justified in being quite angry with the person and thinking them awful, etc. They can’t really be held accountable, though, in the way that the person in the relationship who cheated can be. The person who cheated would be, I’m assuming, in a position of being trusted by their significant other. They alone are accountable for breaking that trust. The person they cheated with may be pressed to feel guilt for helping the betrayal along, but they were never in a position of loyalty to begin with.
It’s a nasty thing to do, but aside from common courtesy and personal conscience, I don’t think the person has any obligation not to have sex with someone who is in a relationship, even if it’s wrong.

It’s an issue of social responsibility. The implied effect of the affair is that it causes pain and suffering to a third party. Catherine’s consent to the affair, knowing that a third person would be hurt as a direct result of her acquiescence, makes her a party to the effect.

It takes two to tango when it comes to the affair, and both parties’ actions create a consequence that is harmful to a third party.

In a society that is diverse in culture, morals, beliefs, we are all bound by the letter of the law. The intent of the law is to uphold a common set of moral beliefs, in this case, that marriage and fidelity is both sacred and a legal contract of exclusivity.

By Catherine being a party to violating the moral contract (an ‘accessory’ if you will), her knowledge of her actions and the implied consequences that will result from her actions, make her a party to the dissolution of the contract between the husband and wife.

If we all have differing morals, is it not our responsibility to respect that our morals (or lack thereof) come at the expense of the destruction or demoralization of another? Whether you know that person or not, you exist in the same society, use the same resources (literally in this case), and abide by the same laws.

In America, our moral standards are based on Christian/Deist beliefs. If you don’t believe in those religions, so be it. But our society survives and thrives because people have enough self-respect, and respect for their fellow citizens to respect their morals and beliefs, especially if in not doing so, you cause injury to another citizen.

If you put the shoe on the other foot, meaning, you were the Wife, how would you feel about the mistress? Would you simply say “well, she was just a vessel for my husband to deposit his umm…” you get the picture.

The husband obviously violated his contract by emotionally and physically divesting from his wife, without her knowledge or consent. Is Catherine, knowing that his actions are injurious to the wife, and “lending” herself to that action and result, a party to the demoralization of the wife?

Look at the effects of said action. Look at the cause (two people agreeing to an illicit affair, in spite of the possible consequences). The fact that it is devious, covert, and hidden from the wife, implies that both parties of the affair know it’s wrong. By that argument, would it matter if Catherine and ‘hubby’ did the deed in the husband’s bed, knowing the wife was coming home? Do you think Catherine would be “smarter” than that?

If she didn’t think her actions made her culpable, then, would Catherine be equally ambivalent about notifying the wife ahead of time? How about this: Catherine giving said wife a “courtesy call” that she’ll be bonking her husband in their bed before she gets home, but ‘promises’ to change the sheets when they’re done? How absurd would that be?

Although this article may imply bias (it’s from a recovery site for those who find themselves in the wife’s position), but it is pretty plain to see that because of the actions of two people, the effect is the injury to another person. Check it out and let me know what you think:

http://www.network54.com/Realm/HealingHeart/batinfid.html

In sum: we, as citizens abiding by a common law based on a common set of values/principles, have a human moral obligation to take care of one another. Respecting another’s beliefs, values, and contracts (i.e. marriage), is the foundation for a just society. This would be the case in infidelity (illegal in some states), and any other illicit activity.

I’m now going to load a bong and leave it outside with a lighter at the local park. I’m not responsible if some parent “let’s their kids” experiment with it. And in California, I have a license to use said substance, so I’m not breaking a law; it’s the parent’s fault for not educating their kids about using someone else’s stash…

Preposterous…

Edit: I posted in the wrong thread!!! Sorry, I meant to post this here

@sndfreQ It’s ok, it’s a great answer either way.

@Blackberry Thanks :)

They are the lowest of the low,