Patterico's Pontifications

7/25/2015

Remember When Going To A Baseball Game Was Actually About Watching The Game And Not Breaking Up A Marriage??

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:48 am



[guest post by Dana]

So, two sisters at a baseball game not only decided it was their business to spy on the woman in front of them and read her text messages, they also took it upon themselves to disrupt a marriage of 29 years:

Two sisters attending a baseball game claim that they exposed a man’s cheating wife after catching her running the bases with another man on her cellphone.

Photos taken over the woman’s shoulder during Wednesday night’s Atlanta Braves game showed the unidentified woman appearing to sext someone in between cuddling with her man.

Delana and Brynn Hinson posted photos of her texts on Twitter, Brynn writing: “These hoes ain’t loyal so we expose em.”

The texts included declarations of love and some were sexual in nature.

Upon leaving the stadium, the sisters handed the unaware husband a note:

“Your wife is cheating on you. Look at the messages under Nancy! It’s really a man named Mark Allen,” it read.

At least two photos taken over the woman’s shoulder shows racy messages sent to a ‘Nancy.’ They later appear to refer to the person on the other end as ‘Mark Allen.’

One of the sisters further provided her phone number on the note, saying she took photos of her phone and can share them if the texts are deleted.

“We handed it to him as they were walking away.. She was in front of him.. He quit walking and gave us a thumbs up,” Delana, who lists herself as a criminal justice major online, said on Twitter.

As a result of being informed of his wife’s texting, the husband apparently contacted them for evidence of her infidelity. After providing him with photos, the husband told the sisters that he appreciated that they had told him what was taking place.

And most ironically, this from one of the sisters:

After I sent him the pictures, we didn’t talk… I don’t think he’s confront her yet.

I want to ask him, but it’s not my place.

The sisters have been lauded for their interference intervention involvement, as well as criticized for putting their noses where they didn’t belong.

–Dana

162 Responses to “Remember When Going To A Baseball Game Was Actually About Watching The Game And Not Breaking Up A Marriage??”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (86e864)

  2. Seems almost too good to be a true story. Those are some nosy nosy nosy intrusive sisters.

    JD (3b5483)

  3. A truly just universe would reveal the husband to be “Mark Allen”.

    kishnevi (294553)

  4. Something similar happened to me in high school(do they still call it that?). Someone gave me a heads-up to the behavior of my, then, steady girl. My take away was the realization that I had let my hormones get in the way of what was soooo obvious, that I was so blinded by said hormones that it took a noseybody to alert me to it.

    Of course I have not read the link, nor do I have any knowledge of the details concerning this cuckolded guy, but my instincts say that if the guy appreciated the intervention (as reported), then he had at least a suspicion as to what was going on.

    felipe (56556d)

  5. Yeah, Kish, like the Pina colada song.

    BTW, I bought a bottle of Abalour A’bunadh (batch#50, 59.6%alc/vol). All I can say is Yikes! It is, without a doubt, the strongest tasting spirit I have ever imbibbed – on the rocks with a splash of distilled water! Yes, I was forewarned by both the “suggested advice” and by my nose which screamed “wait-a-minnit, wait-a-minnit!”

    So after having served (and sampled) 1/2 of the bottle over the last week, I have decided that it is not my cup of tea. This particular whiskey has no “peaty” taste to it – the main thing that draws me to Scotch. Also, my taste buds confirmed that I do not like (for some unknown reason) blended whiskey.

    I still must thank you for the suggestion because others who tried it, loved it! So, a win in my book.

    felipe (56556d)

  6. Felipe,

    Given your own experience, albeit in high school and with a girlfriend, would you have any hesitations about informing a husband of his wife’s questionable texting? Aside from the unthical decision to snoop on a perfect stranger’s text messages..

    Dana (86e864)

  7. It could be a phony story make up to go viral. If not, she made her bed so it is time for her to sleep in it.

    AZ Bob (34bb80)

  8. I like the way you phrased you query, Dana. I have already been in a similar situation, unfortunately. I will tell you what I did, and you tell me if it can be called hesitation, or discretion, or something else.

    I was a guest at my cuckolded friend’s house where about five other guests our host, and I sat down to a game of poker. Our host’s wife spent a little too much time standing very closely to a certain man at the table, in what I would characterize as a pretense of giving poker advice. This certain man made an off-color remark about needing advice “from a skirt”, and our host’s wife walked off in a huff.

    Several guests (some women) laughed at the joke, but this certain man, realizing that our host’s wife had left, got up in pursuit. The laughing stopped and all was silent. Our host tried to restart conversation, but all remained quiet. So I spoke, saying: “Do you not see what is going on?” He said nothing was “going on.” To which I replied “then go see what they are doing right now.”

    This guy was so in denial that he made a point of ignoring the missing couple for the remainder of, at least, my stay there, which wasn’t long because I felt uncomfortable. When I made my farewell, he walked me to my car and said that he was sorry that I “needed to go.” All I could say was “look, just keep an eye on him.”

    This couple filed for divorce after he checked her phone and found an inadvertent recording of her conversation with this same “certain man” where a problem of setting up a tryst focused on her husband’s travel plans. Now I did not check her phone, true. But I tried to do right by my friend when the opportunity arose.

    felipe (56556d)

  9. The person who interfered in the marriage isn’t the sisters who noticed the cheaters public text8ng. That would be the dude she was banging.

    Sgt ted (61038f)

  10. Dana, I just realized that I failed to address one of your points; “a perfect stranger.” This is, I would say, a BIG point. Right now, I would say that I would butt out and then pray for their marriage. But I can see myself butting in, if asked to, by another, complete stranger. Kind of like a vampire (or the police) needing to be invited into a home.

    felipe (56556d)

  11. Sgt ted (61038f) — 7/25/2015 @ 1:03 pm

    Good point, in the grand scheme of things.

    felipe (56556d)

  12. Colonel, we need your good talents. Please regale us with your version of “Take me out to the ball game!”

    felipe (56556d)

  13. Not too much different than a coupla teenage peepers looking through the window watching Mrs Jones’ nooner, then telling Mr Jones about it when he comes home from work. Once upon a time more folks minded their own business

    Angelo (4b203a)

  14. Take me out
    To the ball game
    Take me out
    To the crowd
    Find me some b*tches
    to spy upon
    I’ll tell their hubbies
    who’s mowin’ their lawn

    Let me rat, rat, rat
    out the hose beasts
    If they don’t pay
    It’s a shame
    For it’s time to
    make these hoes pay
    At the old ball game!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. I got caught up in something like that where a friend said his wife must have left her phone in the car and as long as I was in the area would I run by this address and see if her car was there. It was, and I asked if I should knock on the door and tell her to call and he said no.
    About two hours later he called again and just wanted me to go by and see if the car was there and I did, but asked what was going on… so he told me he thought his wife was cheating on him and he was on his way to confront them.
    I told him no and that if I saw him come there I’d call 911 so he’d not hurt anyone and wind up the bad guy… he promised me he’d just say hey I know what is up now and I told him if he wasn’t out of there in 10 minutes, 911.
    So he shows up and decides to go over the back fence… wrong fence dumbass… he winds up in these old peoples back yard knocking on their sliding glass door. They should have shot him, but he says oops climbs out and over the right fence this time and catches them in the act on the couch in front of the sliding window. I hear yelling he comes out front pissed, his wife is following him yelling crap at him and I see the guy peeking out, so he is alive. My friend takes off… me too before she spots me.

    That whole thing ruined his life. He lost his house, business and family in the breakup. He quit trying in life and drifted around an untethered mess. Still is. To this day I wish I could have done something that would have made it different.

    steveg (fed1c9)

  16. Wouldn’t you want to be told?

    I would.

    gahrie (12cc0f)

  17. If you’re stupid enough to do it in public, and callous enough to do it next to your spouse, you deserve everything you get. I bet the hubby was relieved to finally find out what he suspected all along. Know why divorce is expensive? Cos it’s worth it!

    Gazzer (f23e3c)

  18. Me and Mrs. Jones, we got a thing going on
    when she wears that damn thong
    Wood’s much too strong to let it go now
    We boink every day on the same duvet
    Twelve-thirty, I know she’ll be there
    Straining hard, kids play in the yard
    While the jukebox plays our favorite song
    Me and Mrs., Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Jones
    We got a thing going on
    We both know that it’s wrong
    But we bang that gong, can’t let it go now
    We gotta be extra careful
    That her husband don’t come home for lunch
    he’ll come thru the front door as I go out the back
    and he’ll be mad, just call it a hunch
    Me and Mrs., Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Jones, Mrs. Jones

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  19. This looking over the shoulder at someone texting thing is actually important to know about and to be conscious of. Earlier in the season I was at the ball park and texted to a friend to let her know where we were seated and mentioned there was a very loud, shrieking and obnoxious (opposing team) fan sitting right behind us and ruining the game for us. The fan behind then got even more loud and crude and finally yelled “I DO hope you’re enjoying this. I could read every word of your text to your friend, you know.”

    I don’t text at the ball game any more. Too creepy.

    elissa (b21e57)

  20. Snitches get stitches, is the rule I’d apply, here. What a couple of filthy, vicious, tuncs.

    nk (dbc370)

  21. C U Next Tuesdays, I’d say

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  22. Lord, save us those who want to “help” us.

    in_awe (ca1efd)

  23. This couple filed for divorce after he checked her phone and found an inadvertent recording of her conversation with this same “certain man” where a problem of setting up a tryst focused on her husband’s travel plans. Now I did not check her phone, true. But I tried to do right by my friend when the opportunity arose.

    felipe (56556d) — 7/25/2015 @ 1:02 pm

    A major difference, though, Felipe. Our two heroes/miscreants, from what I can tell, had no personal relationship with the “wronged” party. You however were a friend (I don’t know how close) and were attempting to be such when you spoke up. You were right. Those two, at the very least, were misguided.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  24. Keeping score of the game was asking too much.

    mg (31009b)

  25. Nice work as always, Colonel Haiku.

    JVW (ba78f9)

  26. Good post. This is an interesting topic that I would summarize as “Does a person have a reasonable expectation of privacy when texting at a public venue?”

    There is also an ethical component with interfering with someone else’s private life/marriage. Should it matter if there are kids involved? This marriage involved an older couple but what if they were younger so they might have small kids and/or if they had their kids with them?

    DRJ (1dff03)

  27. Why thanks, JVW. A sordid subject though…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  28. A few states recognize a law called alienation of affections that permits one spouse to sue a third party for interfering with a marriage in a way that leads to the disruption or dissolution of the marriage. Usually it is used by the cuckolded spouse against the third party paramour.

    I know it sounds weird but I wonder if these nosy fans might have some exposure if the wife brought a claim? Lucky for them, Georgia apparently isn’t one of those states, but there’s a few other torts that come to mind like intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  29. Call me old fashioned, but I think that married people who sneak around and dishonor their marriage vows are the lowest.. especially if they have children.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  30. I think it’s wrong, too, but is the solution to destroy the marriage? It’s one thing to intervene as a friend or family member, but these people are strangers to the marriage. Is there a role for strangers.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  31. Their parents taught them to like baseball but they didn’t teach them to not to be tattletales. These are the kind of girls who also make up false accusations in my opinion. Stupid, petty, vicious trash.

    nk (dbc370)

  32. I’ll tell their hubbies
    who’s mowin’ their lawn

    LOL! Classic, colonel. you never disappoint.

    Y’know what? I’m beginning to think JD is right to call BS (can I say that, JD?) on this story. When I reflected, anew, on my friend’s plight, and further consider steveg’s account, it seems way odd, even queer that this cuckolded guy would give a “thumb’s up.” As Columbo would say, “sump’m just doesn’t add up.”

    felipe (56556d)

  33. I don’t want to jinx the thread, but I expect Perry to chime in at any moment about how it is hypocritical to “judge” these two chicks when we do not “judge” people at The Center For Medical Progress. To say that such a claim lacks any nuance is beyond understatement. Wait, did I use “understatement” correctly? anyway you know what I mean.

    felipe (56556d)

  34. My guess is that the tattletales are found to be carrying their own baggage. Because of course Jesus told us to get the log out of our own eye first before we worry about the speck in another.
    That said, cheating with children is low behavior, but normally I would not be reading the texts of the people in front of me.
    That is a bad behavior of its own and begs the question of why these women are Ok with reading over anothers shoulder.
    Next time bring and Ipad and read TMZ

    steveg (fed1c9)

  35. I despise busybodies. I always have since my early experiences in the Navy.

    We had a rule that what happens on cruise stays on cruise for a reason. And you might think the reason is to cover for everybody’s debauchery in port but that would be wrong.

    Back in the late 80s/early 90s we had to rely on snail mail. It could be months between a letter sent and a reply. So a guy might unthinkingly mentioned that during a port visit to Mombasa, Kenya, he went on a safari with a guy he identified by name.

    The guy he identified by name was in difficult financial straits. Not impossible, not criticial, but difficult. The family had to adhere to a budget.

    The letter recipient, a member of the wives club, told the guy’s wife
    about the safari. The guy’s wife is picturing something epic out of a 1930s movie with hundreds of porters and expensive meals and flowing booze and all, going on and on for weeks.

    She didn’t know that the letter writer and her husband only spent ten dollars on a bus ride through a national park which was advertised as a safari.

    Because of the various time delays; the weeks it takes for the letter to get home, the lag between the wife getting the letter and telling the other wife what her hubby was up to, the time the wronged wife stewed about it, the weeks it took for her angry letter to get to her husband, the delay between writing his letter explaining things and when the next COD took mail off the carrier, and the weeks it took for the mail to crawl home, and the subsequent back and forth, it broke up his marriage.

    So, what happens on cruise stays on cruise. My squadron adopted a rule which I don’t think anyone violated (we had terms for different kinds of rats, the innocent kind who didn’t mean any harm as in the example above or the intentional rat). You didn’t identify anyone by name in a letter home unless you ran it by the person you identified by name.

    Otherwise it was always “me and another guy” or “me and some guys from the boat” because you just couldn’t know what problems you were going to make worse with a casual remark.

    Things have a way of being taken the wrong way, and that’s not exclusive to long enforced separations with limited possibilities for communication like military/naval deployments.

    A buddy of mine working at the time (he has since quit the business)
    a liberal west coast news outlet told me about a purported sexual harassment incident.

    A female reporter riding an elevator between floors complained about a conversation on which she listened in on. A man and woman, whom she knew were married to others and not each other, were talking about what a great time they had together last night, and how they should get together and
    do it more often.

    So this complaining chick was scandalized. She was “mentally raped” because she intruded into none of her business. She was “sexually harassed.”

    Of course the LHMFM major media corporation took things very seriously.

    Not even the early discovery that the two people she spied on who were conversing on that elevator were in fact brother and sister and were just talking about how nice it was to get together for dinner with their parents got in he way of the subsequent inquisition.

    Steve57 (0412d7)

  36. I think Judas not Jesus is the person to refer them to.

    nk (dbc370)

  37. 29 – Col.
    Agreed, I have a hard time being around people – I know that screw their neighbor.
    31 – nk.
    Indeed – American woman gonna mess your mind

    mg (31009b)

  38. Pink Hats should be banned from sporting events.

    mg (31009b)

  39. mg, what do you have against Mr. Peppermint?

    felipe (56556d)

  40. No harm to Mr. Peppermint and am sorry for his passing.
    People that go to sporting events, just to be seen on their phone are pink hats. Plus I doubt these chicks know how many balls it takes to get to first base…

    mg (31009b)

  41. I’ll just say, whether the story is true or not, that in a stadium where the people behind you have a perfect view over your shoulder and it is only a few degrees of inclination difference if they are looking at the field or what is in your hands, be it a book, newspaper, or cell phone, I think there is a difference between going out of your way to spy on someone vs. looking at something that is waving around 3 feet in front of your face.
    What difference that makes, IDK.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  42. 29. Call me old fashioned, but I think that married people who sneak around and dishonor their marriage vows are the lowest.. especially if they have children.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/25/2015 @ 4:42 pm

    You are most definitely old-fashioned. Well past your sell-by date. Now that we have achieved gay marriage, that marriage is no longer between a man and woman but merely two people, the next foundational pillar of western civilization to be destroyed is that marriage is monogamous.

    http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/42014/savage-love-monogamish-couples-share-their-stories/

    In five or ten years happyfascist will be accusing Christian bakers of bad manners for refusing to bake a cake to celebrate whatever celebratory rites the progressives have established to commemorate the long term relationship between married couples and their dominatrix. Or whatever is next. The progressives just may not push for polyamory as their goal is to render marriage meaningless.

    Steve57 (0412d7)

  43. “Plus I doubt these chicks know how many balls it takes to get to first base…”

    OMG and LOL! That sounds funnier than you meant it to be.

    felipe (56556d)

  44. Steve, Scripture agrees with you.
    http://www.torah.org/learning/halashon/intrcomm.html

    kishnevi (294553)

  45. My 44 was in response to Steve at 35.

    kishnevi (91d5c6)

  46. Boys like it when they kiss you on the strikes and you kiss them on the….

    elissa (b21e57)

  47. That’s a classic, elissa.

    mg (31009b)

  48. Pedro to the hall tomorrow, elissa.

    mg (31009b)

  49. It’s a good Cooperstown class, mg.

    elissa (b21e57)

  50. elissa, I hope your man appreciates you as much as I do.

    Steve57 (0412d7)

  51. It sure is, I would have loved to go.

    mg (31009b)

  52. I take that back, elissa. My earlier comment doesn’t do your or your husband nearly enough credit.

    It was careless of me.

    Steve57 (0412d7)

  53. Bravo, Colonel.

    JD (34f761)

  54. I don’t really care about the two sisters snooping; I think the key point to take away is that if you cheat, you have no idea what will trip you up.

    Gabriel Hanna (e354b0)

  55. I don’t really care about the two sisters snooping; I think the key point to take away is that if you cheat, you have no idea what will trip you up.

    Gabriel Hanna (e354b0) — 7/25/2015 @ 8:27 pm

    So, if they’re snooping around in your life Gabe, it makes no difference to you? I wholeheartedly agree that cheating isn’t the brightest act. You will eventually get caught. However, if I’m cheating on my wife/lover/better half/main squeeze/”life partner”, just what business is it of anyone else? Why is how I conduct my private life important to someone who has zero personal connection to me? That seems to be the question here, not whether or not you’ll get busted for cheating.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  56. If you are cheating on your spouse and you are dumb enough that perfect strangers can figure it out in a ball park and inform your spouse. ..well that’s just tough shit isn’t it?

    Sgt ted (61038f)

  57. I’ll just say, whether the story is true or not, that in a stadium where the people behind you have a perfect view over your shoulder and it is only a few degrees of inclination difference if they are looking at the field or what is in your hands, be it a book, newspaper, or cell phone, I think there is a difference between going out of your way to spy on someone vs. looking at something that is waving around 3 feet in front of your face.
    What difference that makes, IDK.

    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 7/25/2015 @ 5:39 pm

    The spying line was crossed when the sisters chose not to simply notice the wife was texting, but willfully worked at reading exactly what she was saying. Their best interest, I believe, was their own voyeurism and thrill that they had *caught* someone.

    Dana (86e864)

  58. Consider, how long It had to take and how many messages had to be read before they figured out “Nancy” was not only a male, but the wife’s paramour,

    Dana (86e864)

  59. how long It had to take and how many messages had to be read before they figured out “Nancy” was not only a male, but the wife’s paramour,

    In this era of GLBT, SSM, Caitlyn Jenner, the Kardashians, “Bathhouse Barry,” Bill Cosby, etc, etc, etc, the wife’s husband, the 2 nosy sisters, and the concept of monogamy and faithfulness come off as rather quaint and square. Hey, get with the program, people! And, hey, philandering wife, wouldn’t you rather be involved with a hot girl instead of a boring ol’ dude?

    Mark (69948d)

  60. Elissa at 46.

    Please issue a spew alert prior to dropping one like that. I had to switch computers after that one. I should know better than to drink while reading the comments.

    Bill M (906260)

  61. This is what trolls do in real life.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  62. Trolls don’t have real lives.

    Gerald A 11/2006 (2c96c6)

  63. Dana (86e864) — 7/25/2015 @ 10:00 pm

    True.
    Admission against interest I’ll just say when I notice someone reading a book, I usually look to see what book it is.
    Maybe they were inappropriate, but I would not consider texting in a stadium to be any more private than talking on the phone.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  64. It’s not the snoopiness, it’s the snitchiness.

    nk (dbc370)

  65. And if you can read the texts on my LG Cosmo from farther than 10 inches away, you should be on the field waiting your turn to bat.

    nk (dbc370)

  66. Dana – you are absolutely correct. They didn’t do this for the man, they engaged in this for their amusement. Voyeur is the perfect term.

    JD (a101d6)

  67. If the errant spouse had been a man snuggling up to his wife while secretly texting his girlfriend, would we be so concerned about the girl’s motivations?

    ropelight (42312a)

  68. I hope the dudes behind the two sisters spent the game looking down their blouses.

    Pious Agnostic (4e1a81)

  69. If the errant spouse had been a man snuggling up to his wife while secretly texting his girlfriend, would we be so concerned about the girl’s motivations?

    Yes. They are still perfect strangers, they are still snooping into the private lives of others without invitation, and they are still in it for the cheap thrills.

    Dana (86e864)

  70. My follow on book will be:
    a

    Dating Jennifer Anniston is a Team Effort

    Steve57 (0412d7)

  71. Yes. They are still perfect strangers, they are still snooping into the private lives of others without invitation, and they are still in it for the cheap thrills.

    How about they saw blatant betrayal being played out right under their noses, realized that ignoring it or keeping quiet about it was tantamount to condoning infidelity, and decided they had a moral obligation to warn the victim?

    ropelight (42312a)

  72. The snitch ethic (yes, the snitch ethic, not the “no-snitch” ethic) runs deep in the petit bourgeoisie. It’s why we don’t have as big a need for secret police. Your neighbor will rat on you out of self-righteous sanctimony.

    nk (dbc370)

  73. People who seriously use the word “snitch” are either children or criminals.

    Sgt ted (61038f)

  74. Personally, I’m of the Albert Anastasia school of thought. Fourth paragraph down at the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Anastasia#Boss

    nk (dbc370)

  75. rope light,

    I sympathize with that concern but I also question whether strangers can know with certainty that they are seeing a “blatant betrayal.”

    I’m often the lone commenter arguing that strangers should be able to call the police if they are concerned when they see children alone and at risk, because we need to put their safety first. But I don’t see why we need strangers to inject themselves into a marriage between adults.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  76. I think it’s different if you are a family member or friend who knows more facts and feels a duty to intervene.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  77. This entire post has taken things low and inside… what initially appeared to be a hanging curve ended up a screwball.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  78. The very first coin minted by the new United States had printed on it: “MIND YOUR BUSINESS”. Generally I believe that to be a valid philosophy still.

    Hoagie (f4eb27)

  79. I’m often the lone commenter arguing that strangers should be able to call the police if they are concerned when they see children alone and at risk, because we need to put their safety first.

    Very similar to what I felt when a grown man lifted a six year old kid over the school yard fence to get his ball when all the man had to do was pick up the ball and toss it back over himself.

    Dana (86e864)

  80. How about they saw blatant betrayal being played out right under their noses, realized that ignoring it or keeping quiet about it was tantamount to condoning infidelity, and decided they had a moral obligation to warn the victim?

    As mentioned above, most people here at the site complain vociferously about the free range kids’ parents being contacted by the authorities because parents are responsible for them and have the right to decide when and where their children play, and especially as nothing has happened to the kids. Shouldn’t parents have a right to make decisions for their children? Likewise, don’t adults have the right to make choices for their marriages, for better or worse, without that *right* and privacy therein being challenged by anyone other than the spouse/children?

    Why not a moral obligation to mind their business and not interfere in another person’s marriage? Our own junior version of the morality police? Do we really want strangers policing our marriages? I know I don’t.

    Dana (86e864)

  81. Further, if this exposure came from a good place (meaning they truly just had the husband’s best interest at heart), why would they plaster it all over social media and why are we reading about it in several media outlets? Why wouldn’t the note to the husband be sufficient? Why it’s almost as if they were looking for attention… If the husband were the only concern, none of us would even know about this.

    Dana (86e864)

  82. why would they plaster it all over social media and why are we reading about it in several media outlets?

    Cos they nasty attention-seekers?

    nk (dbc370)

  83. Stories like this deserve to be placed against the backdrop of just how shame-free and cheaply exhibitionist our culture has become.

    The 2 prying sisters were influenced by that (IOW, they’re so desensitized by the dumbed-down nature of things, they didn’t realize (or care) that the situation was really pathetic and that they therefore should have backed away, if only due to sheer embarrassment—for themselves and the couple), the cheating wife was influenced by that (so shameless she didn’t mind the text-messaging tactics she had devised while sitting next to her husband in a public setting), perhaps even the cuckolded husband will be influenced by that—hell, he may wonder if there’s a way to make some money from the publicity.

    The culture of shoddy reality TV writ large.

    Mark (69948d)

  84. Everyone wants their 15 minutes of fame now that celebrity is the same as accomplishment.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  85. Aside from saying something about why this shows the need for baseball to speed up their games — so people don’t end up doing things they shouldn’t be doing — it is a bit creepy in terms of privacy to think that someone’s looking over your shoulder and invading your world.

    On the other hand, if texting for cell phones had never been invented, does anyone think the wife would have been on the phone mid-game chatting up her paramour while her husband was sitting right next to her? I don’t think there’s an absolute right to texting privacy, and if you’re dumb enough to do it in a place where there are hundreds or thousands of potential snoopy eyes watching, so sort of pay the price for your own naive assumptions, just like someone who doesn’t think before they post some dumb 140-character comment on Twitter.

    John (bd9426)

  86. Their mother forgot to buy them a copy of Miss Manners; if one prefers an advice Maven the standard advice would be “mind one’s own beeswax”. It’s a breech of honor to publish the private conversations of others, when there is no matter of public concern at stae, and their interference is wrong in every way it is possible to be wrong.

    SarahW (67599f)

  87. Everyone wants their 15 minutes of fame now that celebrity is the same as accomplishment.

    And in the pursuit of that, there’s no longer any sense of proportion or even a bit of modesty at all in the public realm.

    A trophy handed out at the ESPN awards and named for Arthur Ashe, dedicated to those exhibiting courage (presumably in sports), was given to “Caitlyn” Jenner not long ago, reportedly due to that person’s private lobbying efforts—my emphasizing the latter. The former Olympic star’s acceptance speech is on Youtube and out of curiosity I tried to watch more than a few minutes of it, but I couldn’t.

    BTW, the nonchalantly exhibitionist Jenner has described himself as a right-leaning Republican.

    The wheels have come off the clown car in America, circa 2015.

    Mark (69948d)

  88. There isn’t a reasonable expectation of privacy in talking on the phone in a public place like a baseball stadium. You don’t have to eavesdrop to overhear conversations with modern cell phones. In fact, it’s hard not to hear other conversations.

    However, I would have thought texting could be done privately and would be treated that way, until I read this. Obviously not.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  89. Do these women work at the IRS?
    That agency employs lots of people who were born to snitch.
    They like nothing better than a walk on balls

    steveg (fed1c9)

  90. Followed by a pinch hit

    steveg (fed1c9)

  91. and then reaching 3rd base and sliding home!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  92. foul ball!

    steveg (fed1c9)

  93. wait,
    pop up
    fielders choice… but no one chooses… uh oh

    steveg (fed1c9)

  94. Busted, a cheating wife (or husband) is. A big deal it is not! If cheater was not cheating, busted she would not be! Messenger to blame it is not! Burglar in house breaks and injured is. Sues nome owner then he does and wins! Evil it is! Same, same! Blame the one who committed the wrong first you do!

    Yoda (7d462a)

  95. The messengers aren’t to blame for the cheating spouse, but they are responsible for their conduct. Giving the husband a private note expressing their concerns is one thing. I could almost understand that, even though they could be wrong and could be causing great harm. But, to me, publicizing the story online is wrong.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  96. Yoda some Jews hiding in attic knows? Against the law it is. Gestapo call he should.

    nk (dbc370)

  97. Some are fans of the triple play…

    mg (31009b)

  98. she showed me her “moonshot” and we started with a a little “chin music”. She said “touch ’em all” and then gave me a “whiff”. I threw her a “backdoor slider”, right up in her “wheelhouse” and I was soon “in the hole”. It was a “Ruthian” effort.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  99. Yoda some Jews hiding in attic knows? Against the law it is. Gestapo call he should.
    nk (dbc370) — 7/26/2015 @ 4:06 pm

    Winner of the Godwin prize you are! Protecting Jews in hiding, and breaking solemn vows of marriage are not same! Ashamed you should be of portraying Yoda as a Nazi! Rebuke you I do! Product of the dark side you are!

    Yoda (7d462a)

  100. But, to me, publicizing the story online is wrong.
    DRJ (1dff03) — 7/26/2015 @ 4:03 pm

    Yoda remembers great quote made by Son. “Everything that is done in the dark, will be brought into the light.”

    Yoda (7d462a)

  101. DRJ,

    Here quote is from Texas appreciate in relation to this you might. “If you are gonna dance, you’ve gotta pay the fiddler!”

    Yoda (7d462a)

  102. Good stuff, Col.

    mg (31009b)

  103. DRJ

    I wonder how many subpoenas for photographs of spouses cars going through the Txdot cameras are received everyday for family court matters..

    I also wonder if the movement towards gay marriage rights – strengthens the pact of marriage that it is now a type of state and federal license to cohabitate and interference in any kind of marriage or the breaking of vows should revert back to being a crime again….

    EPWJ (67aa96)

  104. foul ball!

    steveg (fed1c9) — 7/26/2015 @ 3:26 pm

    For that you need one of those safety nets stretched from pole to pole.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  105. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

    They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

    Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

    And Jesus lifted Himself up and said, Twinkle, twinkle, little snitch, mind your own business you nosy ____.

    nk (dbc370)

  106. Hey, Yoda, how can you tell who the jailhouse snitch is? He uses his one phone call to call Crimestoppers.

    nk (dbc370)

  107. ittle snitch, mind your own business you nosy ____.
    nk (dbc370) — 7/26/2015 @ 5:49 pm

    Quote the rest of it you did not!

    6They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground.

    7But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”

    8Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.

    9When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. 10Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?”

    10Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?”

    11She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”

    12Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, “I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.”

    13So the Pharisees said to Him, “You are testifying about Yourself; Your testimony is not true.”

    14Jesus answered and said to them, “Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from or where I am going but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.

    15″You judge according to the flesh; I am not judging anyone.

    16″But even if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone in it, but I and the Father who sent Me,

    17″Even in your law it has been written that the testimony of two men is true.

    18″I am He who testifies about Myself, and the Father who sent Me testifies about Me.”

    19So they were saying to Him, “Where is Your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither Me nor My Father; if you knew Me, you would know My Father also.”

    Yoda (7d462a)

  108. I condensed it, actually.

    nk (dbc370)

  109. Testing Him they were, trying to entrap Him. Analogy for your case this does not make. Rightly accused she was, and rightly accused this other woman was. No throwing of stones occurred, but betrayal of her spouse was brought out of darkness and into the light it was.

    Prevent him from STD maybe? Or treatment receive if already infected he has become. Yoda all sides he sees. Condemn someone if they defend themselves you would! Who is in the wrong first? The one who hits first, or the one who hits back? Hmmmmmmmmm?

    Appreciate it I would if it revealed cheating Mrs. Yoda! To the Jedi Master doctor I would hie!

    Yoda (7d462a)

  110. Quite right, Master Yoda. And to bring it in home:

    “Although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles [or clericalist praise from others]. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them.”

    -Rom 1:21-32 rsv

    Yeah, it’s tough to be a sinner.

    felipe (56556d)

  111. Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them.”

    -Rom 1:21-32 rsv

    Yeah, it’s tough to be a sinner.
    felipe (56556d) — 7/26/2015 @ 6:38 pm

    Yoda repented sinner he is,but approve those who practice them, I do not!

    Yoda asks simple question! From what trait does most if not all sin flow? Hmmmmmm?

    Yoda (7d462a)

  112. Yoda, hint he will give. With the first sin committed at its root it is!

    Yoda (7d462a)

  113. From what trait does most if not all sin flow?

    Self-righteousness? Doing wrong while thinking you’re doing right?

    nk the unrepentant sinner (dbc370)

  114. I also have a question: Who is the Bible’s biggest villain? I will also give a hint: His name starts with J and end in s and the letters in-between are u, d, and a.

    nk the judgmental sinner (dbc370)

  115. From what trait does most if not all sin flow?

    Pride.

    Dana (86e864)

  116. So, if I spied on these sisters’ texts and told others about the contents, they’d be cool with it? What’s that? They wouldn’t? My, how shocking.

    Look, the wife should be condemned for cheating, but we’re not talking about her being busted by some law enforcement officials involved in a sting operation or something. Civilians invading someone else’s privacy (regardless of the reason) is a slippery slope society really doesn’t need to be on (though we’re probably already strapped to an out of control bobsled based on that recent Gawker story).

    tops116 (d094f8)

  117. Pride.
    Dana (86e864) — 7/26/2015 @ 7:02 pm

    Close! Try again!

    Yoda (7d462a)

  118. The first sin was eating the fruit of the Tree, so that means gluttony. Or maybe greed.

    But most people who write on the subject say what Dana said. Pride, because sin at its root is putting the self before God.

    kishnevi (294553)

  119. @55 Bill H.:So, if they’re snooping around in your life Gabe, it makes no difference to you?

    You really can’t get that out of anything I’ve actually written. To begin with, in this situation they were reading over someone’s shoulder in a public place, not going through their trash or following them from work. What the Ashley Madison hackers did is much worse morally, I think; they did do something like go through other people’s trash, people they already knew to be as guilty as the hackers were.

    All I mean is that it’s beside the point. If you are going to do something like that you don’t know what might trip you up. It might be your friend who didn’t know you gave him as an alibi. It might be a flat tire. It might be a cop who pulls you over and thinks the woman you’re with is your wife. It might be Ashley Madison charged you for security they don’t really provide.

    This women seemed to take a small-hearted joy in busting a cheating woman, and seem to enjoy the national attention they are getting, but from the perspective of the cheating woman, it could have been any number of things that tripped her up.

    Gabriel Hanna (e354b0)

  120. No, no, no, no, no! First sin was not eating! First sin by Lucifer was lusting (coveting) God’s throne. First sin by mankind was Eve lusting after the Forbidden Fruit. Lusting after other gods, other people’s possessions, lusting after their spouses, their fame, et al. Bible says that lust of money (mammon) is the root of all evil, but it is lust that is at the root of lusting after money!

    Demoncraps, Yoda refers to the Democratic Party! Why? Like the Devil they are! Class warfare they promote-lusting after others possessions and money. Just as Lucifer used Eve’s lust for the Forbidden Fruit! Already standing there and lusting after it, when find her he did! And Adam lusting after not being alone if condemn her he did, and not trusting the LORD to provide him with another helpmate.

    Yoda (7d462a)

  121. Going to have to disagree with you, kishnevi, and you too, yoga.

    , “Then the serpent said to the woman, ‘You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.”4

    Why did she want to eat the fruit of the tree when God told her no?

    She wanted to be like God.

    Pride in all its destructive glory.

    Dana (86e864)

  122. Oh dear, yoda, not yoga. Ipad auto-correct.

    Dana (86e864)

  123. Poor Eve was probably already pregnant and had cravings. (Since I don’t recognize Milton as an Apostle, I’ll just ignore your depiction of Lucifer.) Adam and Eve’s literal original sin was disobedience. Their literal secondary sin was obtaining knowledge, which is also the sin in the myth of Prometheus except there Prometheus was punished for it and not humanity.

    I say “literal sin” because I don’t agree that’s what Original Sin is. I think Original Sin is a way of describing the corruption of the Spirit when it is breathed into clay. But I have no license to preach. YMMV

    nk (dbc370)

  124. your depiction of Lucifer = Yoda’s depiction of Lucifer

    nk (dbc370)

  125. She wanted to be like God.

    Pride in all its destructive glory.
    Dana (86e864) — 7/26/2015 @ 8:20 pm

    Bolded the key is! Stated it could be, “She lusted to be like God.”

    Synonyms for lust: Want,crave, hunger, covet, yearn. Pride it was not, but lusting after what was forbidden.

    Yoda (7d462a)

  126. (Since I don’t recognize Milton as an Apostle, I’ll just ignore your depiction of Lucifer.)

    nk (dbc370) — 7/26/2015 @ 8:22 pm

    Yoda’s depiction of Lucifer it is NOT! The Lord’s depiction it is!

    Isaiah 14:12How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

    13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

    14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

    15Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

    Bah, Milton! Done more for Satan than even his demons he has! Has Lucifer saying, “Better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven.”

    Newsflash! YHWH create Gehenna for Satan to rule, HE did not! Created for punishment of Satan and his angels, HE did!

    Yoda (7d462a)

  127. It’s dangerous to take the Old Testament literally, but a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. It’s pretty obvious to me reading the chapter in its entirety that Isaiah is talking about a man, the king of Babylon.

    nk (dbc370)

  128. And just who was the power behind the king? It is this being that YHWH is addressing. No mere man could ascend into Heaven! Notice that it is Lucifer that is addressed, not Nebuchadnezzar, but the true king, or should I say prince, as in Prince of Evil.

    Yoda (7d462a)

  129. Good night all! To see Jedi Master’s doctor early in morning, I must. Off to bed I am.

    Yoda (7d462a)

  130. Anyway, I agree with you about Milton and his Puritan ilk. They did elevate Satan into almost a brother deity to God, like the Zoroatrians with their Ormuz and Ahriman.

    nk (dbc370)

  131. @nk, Dana: Since Eve didn’t have knowledge of good and evil before eating the apple, she couldn’t have known it was a sin to disobey God.

    God is all-powerful and of course can punish her if He likes, despite His having made her–deliberately–without moral sense. But it is very hard to see how Eve can be considered culpable. She had no way to know it was wrong to disobey without having first disobeyed. And so I find it difficult to see how eating the apple could have the been the occasion of the first sin.

    The text supports this: when God notes they have made themselves clothes He asked them how they knew to be ashamed of being naked, and confronts them with having eaten of the tree. So God of course knew that they didn’t know it was wrong to disobey Him before they ate of the tree.

    Logically it seems that the first sin has to be whatever they did wrong immediately after eating the apple. Perhaps it was their nakedness; that is the first thing they felt shame about. Or maybe it was when Adam tried to blame it all on Eve.

    Gabriel Hanna (802c45)

  132. @nk, Dana: Since Eve didn’t have knowledge of good and evil before eating the apple, she couldn’t have known it was a sin to disobey God.

    With all due respect, this sounds like a child’s defense of disobedience:

    Mother: Honey, did you take one of the cookies that I said not to?

    Child: yes.

    Mother: You shouldn’t have done that.

    Child: But why?

    Mother: Because I said not to.

    Child: But why?

    And the disobedient have been saying it ever since. Playing semantics with God will get you nowhere.

    felipe (56556d)

  133. First of all, it’s a myth. Second, we in the here and now, are not expiating Adam’s sin but, at most, its consequences — the mortality, the corruptibility, and the temptations of the flesh. We are responsible for our own debts, Adam having deprived us of being trust fund babies, to put it another way. But not his.

    nk (dbc370)

  134. @felipe: Playing semantics with God will get you nowhere.

    You have chosen probably the least defensible ground here.

    If a 12 year old takes cookies from the jar you have forbidden, a punishment for disobedience is appropriate. If a six-month-old does, it isn’t. (If you think six months old is old enough to have moral sense, fine, then the child is six weeks old.) And it’s for the same reason as Adam and Eve.

    This is reflected in our legal system, where lacking the ability to determine right and wrong radically changes the sentencing. This is why the public gets outraged when little girls’ lemonade stands get shut down by the cops for not having the proper permits.

    If God made Adam and Eve colorblind, and told them they could eat the red apples but not the green ones, they would be every bit as “guilty” of disobedience as in the original story.

    It says right in there they couldn’t have known right from wrong without disobeying. Might as well punish a child for insider trading. (Given the recent crackdown on lemonade stands and bake sales I don’t doubt that we’ll be reading about it some day.)

    Gabriel Hanna (e5f1b6)

  135. @nk:First of all, it’s a myth. Second, we in the here and now, are not expiating Adam’s sin but, at most, its consequences…

    I agree 100% with both. Sin, in the oldest parts of the Bible, doesn’t have a moral component, it’s a ritual offense that is expiated by another ritual. The moral component of sin came much later and the older parts of the Bible had to be reinterpreted in that light.

    Gabriel Hanna (e5f1b6)

  136. God is not a 1970s western liberal social philosopher. Who woulda thunk it?

    nk (dbc370)

  137. We’re cross-posting. My 137 is to your 135.

    Re your 136. Adam and Eve already had free will and the apple gave them knowledge. You said that second yourself above. So sin did have a moral component from that point on.

    nk (dbc370)

  138. BTW, your analysis in 135 is Scalia’s analysis of qualified immunity in Bivens actions brought against public officials for Constitutional violations. Too bad he does not apply it across the board to all people for all lawbreaking. 😉

    nk (dbc370)

  139. @nk: So sin did have a moral component from that point on.

    In the reinterpreted version, sure. But all that stuff about not wearing two types of cloth, or all that business with the Red Heifer in Numbers 19, they’re talking not about moral failing but about ritual impurity which has to be cleared up by another ritual, the wave offerings and heave offerings and such.

    Numbers 19 is especially revealing; it is literally impossible for any Jewish person alive today to be ritually clean. And the consequences certainly sound severe:

    “Whosoever toucheth the dead, even the body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself–he hath defiled the tabernacle of the LORD–that soul shall be cut off from Israel; because the water of sprinkling was not dashed against him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.”

    But the means of purification is so extreme that it cannot be complied with. In all of the history of the Jews there have been at most 8 or 9 red heifers, and since the destruction of the Temple no red heifer, if one could be found, could be made use of anyway.

    It seems very strange to say that all living Jews are somehow morally culpable for this ritual impurity.

    Recall Josiah’s astonishment when the book of the law was rediscovered; he rent his clothes because he had just learned that the entire nation had been doing everything wrong for years and that God must be terrifically angry.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  140. Which why the New Covenant.

    nk (dbc370)

  141. Gabriel Hanna (e5f1b6) — 7/27/2015 @ 6:20 am

    It is you who has chosen the least defensible ground when you assert that God’s creation, including his creatures were in any way not perfect. God did not create a six yo, nor a 6 mo, you did for the purpose of casting doubt. It is a grave error to posit that God made a mistake. Can a man judge God?

    This is the serpent’s avenue of attack, to second-guess God to introduce doubt. I would argue that doubt was the fulcrum of original sin.

    felipe (56556d)

  142. LOL, who has/who have!

    felipe (56556d)

  143. nk (dbc370) — 7/27/2015 @ 9:22 am

    Quite right, nk.

    felipe (56556d)

  144. One the one hand, I agree with the sentiment that I’d want to know. On the other hand, if you insert yourself into the relationship like that, you had better be right.

    Texting in a crowded stadium with people all around you, including the ones behind you with an excellent view over your shoulder, isn’t a place where you would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Especially the privacy to cheat on your husband while he’s there with you.

    Advo (939bc8)

  145. Well, I’d argue that I consent to be seen by you when I go out but not by some Bushman on Facebook in the Kalahari. Or on Letterman’s “Stupid People Tricks”. Over-publication has nullified the privilege in defamation cases and maybe it should in invasion of privacy cases, too.

    nk (dbc370)

  146. like the Zoroatrians with their Ormuz and Ahriman.
    nk (dbc370) — 7/26/2015 @ 9:16 pm

    Thought the Zoroastrians worshipped Ahura-Mazda and Aingra-Mainyu?

    Yoda (cffabe)

  147. @felipe:when you assert that God’s creation, including his creatures were in any way not perfect.

    Then why did Eve disobey if she was created perfect? If she had the capacity to disobey she must have been imperfect.

    It is a grave error to posit that God made a mistake.

    I did no such thing. I pointed out that if Eve was created without the sense of right and wrong–as the text clearly states she was–then she could not have known it was wrong to disobey God. I never even said it was wrong for God to impose consequences. I was saying that Eve cannot be held morally responsible for how she was created.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  148. @nk:Which why the New Covenant.

    Jews are Doing It Wrong, I guess.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  149. but ‘used to be’s’ don’t count anymore

    they just lay on the floor

    til we sweep them away with our feelings broom

    happyfeet (831175)

  150. no back to baseball
    Sandy Koufax was a Jew
    had a MEAN FASTBALL!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  151. Thought the Zoroastrians worshipped Ahura-Mazda and Aingra-Mainyu?

    Same guys. Ormuz and Ahriman are Western transliteration variants. Like Xerxes was really something like Ksharyashah.

    nk (dbc370)

  152. Jews are Doing It Wrong, I guess.

    Well, yes. Or if you want to be kinder, along the lines of what you said: “Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.” The lawyers being the Scholars of the (Mosaic) Law.

    nk (dbc370)

  153. The moral of the story is: there are more ways than ever to get caught, and the fact that the person who catches you might be an [insert slang term for the rectum here] doesn’t mean that you are any less busted.

    And yes, Cecile Richards, that includes you, too.

    The not-so-snarky Dana (f6a568)

  154. I am pleased as punch that Ashley Madison got its comeuppance. That’s a different thing entirely.

    nk (dbc370)

  155. Yeah, I’m afraid I’m more offended at the actions of the wife and her paramour.

    Jim S. (a95060)

  156. You really can’t get that out of anything I’ve actually written. To begin with, in this situation they were reading over someone’s shoulder in a public place, not going through their trash or following them from work. What the Ashley Madison hackers did is much worse morally, I think; they did do something like go through other people’s trash, people they already knew to be as guilty as the hackers were.

    Well, yes, I can get that from what you wrote, and here’s why; in a nutshell, you are spying. It makes no difference if you’re going through someone else’s trash, following them from work or reading their iPhone 6 over their shoulder. Those are all- up to a point- legal activities, all morally questionable. You’re hoping to score an advantage from someone else’s carelessness.

    My question to you was, and remains a simple one: is this type of activity ok with you on a personal level? Put another way, is is this the type of behavior you condone when used on you or your family?

    I readily see where this type of snooping is useful. Criminal investigation, for one. But in use simply to play “Gotcha”? You honestly don’t see where inserting yourself into someone else’s life just because you can is wrong?

    Bill H (2a858c)

  157. @Bill H:Put another way, is is this the type of behavior you condone when used on you or your family?

    If I were cheating on my wife, I would not want my wife going through my text messages, much less a complete stranger. If I were not cheating on my wife I’d find it annoying whether she did it or a total stranger did.

    I don’t condone snooping by strangers whether it’s used on me and mine or not. But if I were carrying out my affair publicly in my wife’s presence to the point that strangers notice, it’s me that’s responsible for getting caught, and not “snoopers”.

    Gabriel Hanna (e5f1b6)

  158. I don’t condone snooping by strangers whether it’s used on me and mine or not. But if I were carrying out my affair publicly in my wife’s presence to the point that strangers notice, it’s me that’s responsible for getting caught, and not “snoopers”.

    Gabriel Hanna (e5f1b6) — 7/28/2015 @ 6:34 am

    Thank you good sir. That was exactly the point I was trying to make. And I do agree- if you want to sneak around on your significant other, it’s nobody else’s fault if you get caught. It is an activity you should not be doing in the first place.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  159. 158. …I don’t condone snooping by strangers whether it’s used on me and mine or not. But if I were carrying out my affair publicly in my wife’s presence to the point that strangers notice, it’s me that’s responsible for getting caught, and not “snoopers”.

    Gabriel Hanna (e5f1b6) — 7/28/2015 @ 6:34 am

    It matters what the “snoopers” are noticing.

    In this case they’re looking over some complete stranger’s shoulder and watching her text. And that’s wrong.

    It would be different if she was having sex with her boyfriend in the bleachers.

    Something impossible to ignore. Like, no kidding, accidentally hitting “send all” and broadcasting to everyone in your contact list a detailed account of how wonderful the last romp in the sack with your boyfriend, not your husband, was and how you can’t wait to do it again and going into detail about the new stuff you want to do.

    And what lies you need to use to cover the whole thing up!

    Yeah. I got that email.

    Which brings up an interesting twist on the situation. I come from a world where adultery is still a crime. Because certain relationships are harmful to good order and discipline. For instance the XO can not run around sleeping with the junior enlisted guys wives.

    So that email? The command just couldn’t ignore that.

    On the other hand I’ve seen too many misfires where the situation just wasn’t what it appeared.

    As I commented @35:

    …Not even the early discovery that the two people she spied on who were conversing on that elevator were in fact brother and sister and were just talking about how nice it was to get together for dinner with their parents got in he way of the subsequent inquisition…

    Yeah, if you’re doing it in the street and scaring the horses you deserve to get busted.

    But texting?

    Steve57 (20f7d7)

  160. To quote Linus, “I refuse to become involved in a theological argument”…

    But, to the original point:

    I don’t think the girls did wrong by reading the texts. It’s like rubbernecking at a roadside crash: we all know that we’re screwing up traffic, but we do it anyway.

    What they did do wrong was to give the info to the husband. They should have provided it to the wife, with the admonition that it was just a matter of time until someone else, not as nice, would find out and bust her, and tell her to (I guess I’m violating own precept)

    Go and sin no more.

    bud (30d398)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1743 secs.