The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Romantic infidelity is not necessarily immoral.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/10/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 726 times Debate No: 36563
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




The claim is that romantic infidelity is not necessarily immoral. Under certain circumstances, there is nothing inherently wrong with cheating on one's partner.

I, the instigator, will provide evidence confirming this claim. The contender will attempt to refute the claim by responding to the presented evidence.

The first round is for acceptance. The second and third rounds are for debate. The fourth round is for closing statements.


Romantic immorality is wrong because it just isn't. Why? Because. Well, it isn't.
Debate Round No. 1


There are many conceptions of morality, so to simplify the discussion, a working definition of "morally good action" will be used. Two conditions must be met in order for an action to be morally good.

1. The action must not harm another person.
2. The action increases the wellbeing of at least one person.

Infidelity can satisfy both conditions.

First, infidelity does not necessarily harm another person. Infidelity is harmful only when the other person is cognizant of the cheating. As long as the other person is ignorant of the cheating, he will not feel upset and will happily live his life as if there were no cheating. (This is called the Tinkerbell effect, for those unfamiliar with the concept.) In order for infidelity to meet the first condition then, it is necessary for the cheater to keep his partner ignorant of any indiscretion.

Second, infidelity must make at least one person better off. This condition is easily met. The cheater can be better off due to his romantic involvement with two people rather than only one person.

If those conditions are met, then based upon the working definition of morality, no one has been harmed and at least one person is better off.


Romantic infedity is not good because, um, I dunno it just sounds very complicated and bad...
Debate Round No. 2


That is not a rational position to hold. To say that something is immoral because it is immoral is circular reasoning, a quintessential logical fallacy.


I know right? But it is a very rational position to hold because to say something isn't immoral is immoral is circular reasoning. Which results in a quintessential logical fallacing fallacying fallacic fallacic fallacy.
Debate Round No. 3


I'm posting this comment only because I don't want to forfeit to a troll.


Erm, troll? Dude can you READ? My name is TheBUNNYAssassin. The BUNNY assassin. NOT the TROLL assassin. You should redo second grade...

Sorry bro no offense, but bunnies and trolls are NOTHING alike...
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by evangambit 3 years ago
This is perhaps an interesting topic because it may simply be wrong because we believe it is. That is, the feelings of betrayal, mistrust, heart-break, etc. (that can last for weeks, months, even years) that one risks (because of the expectation in Western culture of loyalty to your culture) in all likeliness will yield a lower level of happiness (if you're a utilitarian).

On the other hand if one lived in a culture of Polyamory, I would have to conclude that there would be nothing wrong with having sexual relationships with multiple people (e.g. Stranger in a Strange Land)
Posted by TheBunnyAssassin 3 years ago
Lol, rabbit guy? You mean the Bunny assassin...

I'm a bunny not a troll, trolls do NOT look like bunnys...

Btw your a N00B!!!!!
Posted by countzander 3 years ago
Disquisition, this rabbit guy is a certified troll. I've "debated" with him before, and if past actions are any predictor of future ones, he will derail the conversation and ruin everything. But this is a really interesting topic, so he you'd (or anyone else) like to debate me--.
Posted by Disquisition 3 years ago
This should be interesting, under what circumstances would romantic infidelity even be justified, unless particular ultimatums were set in play before the relationship began.
Posted by TheBunnyAssassin 3 years ago
Posted by countzander 3 years ago
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is trolololololoing