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!
Reference:
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