Life Is Short; Have an Affair

[Thumpalumpacus]

How this devolved into a discussion about the immorality of cheating, I have no idea. What about a person's privacy? Can't anyone separate one's privacy from what he perceives as the same person's wrongdoing? It's not like we're talking about info on murders here. This is about privacy and how it went downhill, and all you people can do is blame the cheaters. What the [...]?!

Having been cheated on, I look upon cheaters with disdain, and am happy that they are no longer free to use privacy in order to hurt the people they claim to love.

Saying this is only about privacy ignores the reason Anonymous went after these cunts.

[Excited Penguin]

I'm not saying it's only about privacy. I'm saying you should be able to detach yourself from things that don't concern you. Would you like it if someone invaded your privacy like that, revealing something you did that others would consider wrong or are you going to claim you're a saint? Would you like it if everyone's thoughts were somehow read and made public for all to see, including yours? Would you still defend whoever invaded your privacy then? I don't think so. Not even if you were the most innocent person in the world. Privacy is there for a reason and that reason is far more important than whatever Anonymous or whoever uncovers by violating it. It's terrifying that they are able to basically win your trust with this kind of stuff. Maybe it's their intention, really.

There's a reason hacking is illegal. There's also a reason joining a website like that and cheating isn't, wherever that's happening - like in Canada. You should think about those reasons or at least research what they are before you get blindsided with your own biases.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Well, that's like, your opinion, man.

Seriously, my opinion is that people who use privacy in order to hurt others shouldn't complain when their privacy is violated. I'm all for privacy, but I like seeing assholes get their comeuppance.

[Brian37]

I have a huge problem with hacking into a legal business. Sure it is a dick move to go behind someone's back, but humans have always had a ratio of both women and men who do this.

And they can do it with Facebook too. Where does the revenge stop? Why stop at hacking, why not stone them to death like theists have?

How about when fundies try to shut down strip joints by outing patrions? We to assume none of them are going behind their partners back?

I bet there is not one person reading this if they dig deep enough who doesn't have a family member friend or co worker who at some point has done something stupid. Outing someone face to face is one thing, this is carpet bombing on top of being criminal and judgemental.

[Brian37]

Having an affair makes humans part of a flawed species. No one likes being lied to if the parties have agreed to monogamy.

I judge the hypocrisy of theists not because they do it, but because they are judgemental.

To me the only ones with the rights to do anything are those involved directly such as family and friends and a family court if needed. Outside that it is none of my business. Consensual sex amoung adults is still that, even in this case.

[Pyrrho]

I have a huge problem with hacking into a legal business. Sure it is a dick move to go behind someone's back, but humans have always had a ratio of both women and men who do this.

And they can do it with Facebook too. Where does the revenge stop? Why stop at hacking, why not stone them to death like theists have?

How about when fundies try to shut down strip joints by outing patrions? We to assume none of them are going behind their partners back?

I bet there is not one person reading this if they dig deep enough who doesn't have a family member friend or co worker who at some point has done something stupid. Outing someone face to face is one thing, this is carpet bombing on top of being criminal and judgemental.

It has been a while since I read some of the earlier posts, but if my memory is correct, no one has said that they think that hacking should be legal.  What people like about this is that assholes are getting burned on this.  It is kind of like when a thief steals from another thief.  Of course, no one is saying that thievery should be legal; but there is a poetic justice in assholes getting theirs.

I have no problems with the hackers, if caught, getting the full penalty for hacking.  But if a hacker is going to hack, I would much rather a hacker hack a site for assholes run by assholes than them hacking another site.  Just like I would not cry over Donald Trump being murdered.  I think that if he is murdered, then his murderer should be punished, if caught.  But if a murder is going to take place, I would rather an asshole be murdered than someone who isn't an asshole.  I really could not get very upset if someone murdered Donald Trump.  But, I am not condoning murder either.

[Spooky]

I'm personally finding the whole situation completely hilarious

[Mr.wizard]

I'm not defending Duggar, but we might need some confirmation on some of these released names.  It wouldn't take much brain power for Joe Schmuckton in Detweilor, Minnesota to think 'Josh Duggar' might be a fantastic alias to use when he signs up.

And 'Josh' there is just an example.  Hell, I could see a close friend of mine 'borrowing' a name from a porn star if he signed up.  

I wonder how many people on AM are actually single ??    How close would AM check as long as an individual was willing to pay the fees ??

Regarding it really being Josh Duggar, the article said they found his credit card information with a billing address that matches his grandmothers home in Arkansas. So they didn't gather the name from his internet handle, they got it from the personal data that was leaked.

[brewer]

It just keeps getting better. The leaked info is being used for blackmail.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/21/918906...il-bitcoin

http://www.businessinsider.com/ashley-ma...?r=UK&IR=T

[MTL]

I think Ashley Madison is an unsavoury business, to say the least,
but I wonder about the legal implications.

Let's say a man cheats on his wife, without the aid of Ashley Madison.

If his wife finds out about it, she can divorce him for infidelity,
and he will probably have to pay alimony and split his estate with her,
since he was the one who breached their marriage contract.

Now let's say that the husband has a buddy who facilitates his affair.

I think it is an interesting legal question if such a person can be held culpable for facilitation of breach of contract;
much like an accomplice to a murder.

But when that buddy (Ashley Madison) PROFITS by offering said facilitation services,
the legal implications may deepen;

and when you stop and consider that Ashley Madison is not only PROFITING by FACILITATING affairs,
but is in fact ADVERTISING that they have a database of potential mistresses
whom the husband has not even met, as yet,
(as opposed to a man who wasn't even considering an affair,
but unintentionally ended up falling for his secretary, let's say)

...and not only did Ashley Madison advertise that they are in possession of such a database,
but they actively ENCOURAGE people to consider breach of contract with their slogan:

" Life is Short.  Have an Affair. "

The legal implications deepen even further;

and finally, when you consider that the database itself is comprised of not only potential mistresses,
but mistresses WHO ARE, THEMSELVES, MARRIED

(as opposed to having a database of single people who don't care if their hookup is married or not,
and treat Ashley Madison like any other dating or hookup site)

...then they DOUBLE their iniquity twofold, every time.

So,

For every divorce wherein Ashley Madison is implicated,
I would like to see them held legally responsible for charges along the lines of:
- facilitation of breach of contract,
- advertising a database for the purposes of facilitation of breach of contract,
- inciting breach of contract with their slogan.

As I say, if it was murder we were talking about,
anyone who even TURNS A BLIND EYE could be taken to task, legally,
nevermind facilitating or acting as accomplice,
and nevermind advertising their services as a hitman,
and nevermind ENCOURAGING people who were not already considering murder, to consider committing murder.