There is a kind of marriage called “open marriage.” It refers to a marriage in which the partners agree that each may engage in extramarital sexual relationships, without this being regarded as infidelity. In an open marriage, the partners have no promise to keep the loyalty of sex. So, in this way, they will not break the promise because there is no one. And certainly, we cannot regard this kind of adultery as immoral.
What’s more, even though there is a promise for the loyalty of sex in some marriage, when adultery happens, we still cannot directly call it immoral. For example, one partner is paralyzed or seriously ill and he or she is worried about his/her partner may leave him/her, so the loyalty of sex is strongly requested. When time flies, one partner has spared no efforts to take care of the other for years, he/she finally commits adultery because his/her spouse cannot satisfy the sexual needs. In this case, should we call it immoral? We are human beings and have basic physical needs. If we have been responsible for being a good wife/husband to take care our spouse, we deserve the right to have a better life and pursue happiness.
In general speaking, hostility toward adultery is seen as a useful way to protect marriage. If it is really useful, then why is adultery widespread and does divorce rate get higher and higher? So, it is still question that whether discrimination toward adultery can protect marriages. However, I have discussed in Annotation 1 that adultery can be an alternative way to save one’s marriage and also oneself from possible problems happening in the future. In conclusion, adultery deserves a different comment other than “immoral.” And even, we cannot ignore its positive effects. “Not every adultery is the same,” and that means not every adultery is immoral!
Ying-Bin Ning (May, 2002). 通姦不道德嗎? 自由時報
Retrieved from: http://intermargins.net/repression/deviant/Marriage/adultery/articles/2002Jan-Jun/20020513a.htm