If your SO broke laws, would you support them?

[AeneasBK]

in times passed.

On a completely offtopic note - I do love it when I think someone has mis-spelled a common phrase (a la taken for granite) but then discover that the English speaking world is quite evenly divided on how a phrase is spelled/used. I had always thought of it as "in times past" but more fool me for my ignorance it can be either

[CritFromAfar]

I am a survivor which means that I stick up for no one and throw other people to the wolves in order to save myself at first possible opportunity.


Yeah ok. Some of your posts are fucking ridiculous lol.

I don't know why you referred to it that way, most people would probably just consider that having a modicum of self-respect.

Now, if you did that for everything, in all situations, and stepped on toes to rise up in ranks just to make yourself better even in a normal situation, than yeah, I could see the way you worded it making sense. Unless you're referring specifically to abuse cases, which your other posts make me think you weren't.

- - - Updated - - -

On a completely offtopic note - I do love it when I think someone has mis-spelled a common phrase (a la taken for granite) but then discover that the English speaking world is quite evenly divided on how a phrase is spelled/used. I had always thought of it as "in times past" but more fool me for my ignorance it can be either

Taken for granite seems kind of charming, I think I'll use that.

Well. Is it set in stone? (Pun intended.) The way I looked at it, it was a time that had gone by, and was no longer in the present. Which would make sense with 'past', but I was thinking more of times that had actively gone by. I probably was using it wrong, but you could just say that, rather than being facetious.

[AeneasBK]

I probably was using it wrong, but you could just say that, rather than being facetious.

No, sorry, that was my point, I went and googled it and it seems both are acceptable the "taken for granted/granite" is used in Rick and Morty I was just fishing for a popular recent example. Another one I saw was "case in point / case and point". I was sincerely just posting to say I find it interesting, sorry for being offtopic.

[CritFromAfar]

Yes of course. Me and you vs the world, baby.

Ugh. No offense to you, I know you're joking, but I don't understand the desire for couples to feel like they're the only ones in the world when they're together. If you have to pit yourself against everyone else that you care about just to be with someone than it's probably not healthy to begin with.

Other than that... props to you for your loyalty? You'd be partners in crime, as they say. Unless by 'you' you mean me, then... Oh, look, I think I left the stove on.

[AeneasBK]

Unless by 'you' you mean me, then... Oh, look, I think I left the stove on.

I may live in Wales but that's as far as it goes...

[Celista]

I don't know why you referred to it that way, most people would probably just consider that having a modicum of self-respect.

Now, if you did that for everything, in all situations, and stepped on toes to rise up in ranks just to make yourself better even in a normal situation, than yeah, I could see the way you worded it making sense. Unless you're referring specifically to abuse cases, which your other posts make me think you weren't.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here and I think you're misinterpreting my post. I don't feel like having to explain myself at the moment as my dog needs a walk, so adios. Fairly certain I was quite clear given the topic at hand.

- - - Updated - - -

Ugh. No offense to you, I know you're joking, but I don't understand the desire for couples to feel like they're the only ones in the world when they're together. If you have to pit yourself against everyone else that you care about just to be with someone than it's probably not healthy to begin with.

Other than that... props to you for your loyalty? You'd be partners in crime, as they say. Unless by 'you' you mean me, then... Oh, look, I think I left the stove on.

Oh you're one of those people, who reads into posts and derives obscure meanings from them. Maybe you should go tend to that stove, lol.

[CritFromAfar]

No, sorry, that was my point, I went and googled it and it seems both are acceptable the "taken for granted/granite" is used in Rick and Morty I was just fishing for a popular recent example. Another one I saw was "case in point / case and point". I was sincerely just posting to say I find it interesting, sorry for being offtopic.

Oh, well, I wasn't sure either, I just kind of went with whatever seemed like it made the most sense. I don't really watch t.v.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure what you're referring to here and I think you're misinterpreting my post. I don't feel like having to explain myself at the moment as my dog needs a walk, so adios. Fairly certain I was quite clear given the topic at hand.

- - - Updated - - -


Oh you're one of those people, who reads into posts and derives obscure meanings from them. Maybe you should go tend to that stove, lol.

MM, I'm not sure about that. You said you'd throw people to the wolves, how exactly would you be doing that if they committed a crime and you didn't? I think that not supporting someone for something like murder or stalking or robbery, or other such extreme crimes really wouldn't be "throwing them to the wolves", especially if you didn't know they were doing it. They honestly aren't worth loving if they do something to compromise the stability and love of your relationship anyway. I agree with you that it's not worth going to jail over, I just think it's odd you see it as "surviving" rather than just respecting yourself and protecting yourself. You made yourself pretty clear with this post:

Cold keeps me from being someone's bitch in prison, I'm not getting implicated in a crime involving a partner that was committing major felonies behind my back.

Not really. I just don't know enough about you lot to know exactly what you refer to. If Aenaes has a partner they're referring to and they're not just cracking a joke about me, then I don't know them, and I was confused by them saying "you" when as far as I'm aware I don't know that anyone here is that person for them. I was joking about the stove, I just don't like being hit on by strangers. Especially when they don't know me, either. It was me being cautious because I wasn't sure more than anything.

Go have fun walking your dog though.

- - - Updated - - -

I may live in Wales but that's as far as it goes...

Okay, well, my bad. I wasn't sure.

- - - Updated - - -

Depends on what degree you mean by support. Since I love my wife, her doing something stupid like those would not stop that love for her. However, I would not condone it, lie for her or defend her actions. But it is not anything I have to be concerned about.

Support as in, if they did something and you didn't, would you enable them or back them up in their actions? So you got it pretty spot on.

- - - Updated - - -

Depends on what law it is.

Well, that's probably true for a lot of people, but exactly where would you draw the line yourself?

- - - Updated - - -

It depends. On a lot of things.

Like what?

[Cerilis]

Oh, well, I wasn't sure either, I just kind of went with whatever seemed like it made the most sense. I don't really watch t.v.

- - - Updated - - -



MM, I'm not sure about that. You said you'd throw people to the wolves, how exactly would you be doing that if they committed a crime and you didn't? I think that not supporting someone for something like murder or stalking or robbery, or other such extreme crimes really wouldn't be "throwing them to the wolves", especially if you didn't know they were doing it. They honestly aren't worth loving if they do something to compromise the stability and love of your relationship anyway. I agree with you that it's not worth going to jail over, I just think it's odd you see it as "surviving" rather than just respecting yourself and protecting yourself. You made yourself pretty clear with this post:



Not really. I just don't know enough about you lot to know exactly what you refer to. If Aenaes has a partner they're referring to and they're not just cracking a joke about me, then I don't know them, and I was confused by them saying "you" when as far as I'm aware I don't know that anyone here is that person for them. I was joking about the stove, I just don't like being hit on by strangers. Especially when they don't know me, either.

Go have fun walking your dog though.

- - - Updated - - -



Okay, well, my bad. I wasn't sure.

- - - Updated - - -



Support as in, if they did something and you didn't, would you enable them or back them up in their actions? So you got it pretty spot on.

- - - Updated - - -



Well, that's probably true for a lot of people, but exactly where would you draw the line yourself?

- - - Updated - - -



Like what?

The broken law in question, the reasons for doing it, possible victims if any... stuff like this. I don't think I can give a definite answer without being in a situation like that.

[Celista]

MM, I'm not sure about that. You said you'd throw people to the wolves, how exactly would you be doing that if they committed a crime and you didn't? I think that not supporting someone for something like murder or stalking or robbery, or other such extreme crimes really wouldn't be "throwing them to the wolves", especially if you didn't know they were doing it. They honestly aren't worth loving if they do something to compromise the stability and love of your relationship anyway. I agree with you that it's not worth going to jail over, I just think it's odd you see it as "surviving" rather than just respecting yourself and protecting yourself. You made yourself pretty clear with this post:

Refer back to my previous comment, I can't help you if you can't understand my meaning. Also stop trying to impart meaning into my words like I am not the author of them and am unaware as to what I meant when I typed them. I'm not sure why you're questioning my sense of self-respect because I chose to focus my comments on reasons already stated in the thread. Just because I did not type out "oh and he would clearly have been a shitty human being not worthy of my time" (...like, no fucking shit) does not mean that I must have low self-esteem and would have somehow stayed with this person despite my already saying in the thread that I wouldn't. Based on your comments in this thread you have some serious communication issues and also seem passive aggressive.

[CritFromAfar]

Refer back to my previous comment, I can't help you if you can't understand my meaning. Also stop trying to impart meaning into my words like I am not the author of them and am unaware as to what I meant when I typed them. I'm not sure why you're questioning my sense of self-respect because I chose to focus my comments on reasons already stated in the thread. Just because I did not type out "oh and he would clearly have been a shitty human being not worthy of my time" (...like, no fucking shit) does not mean that I must have low self-esteem and would have somehow stayed with this person despite my already saying in the thread that I wouldn't. Based on your comments in this thread you have some serious communication issues and also seem passive aggressive.

The irony. Have you read my post history?

I didn't say you have no self-respect. I was questioning why you used certain language over more distinct language, but overall I still understood what you meant. I agreed with your point, I felt like the phrasing and wording confused it slightly, and that your other post afterward made it more clear. I wasn't questioning your self-respect, I was questioning why you chose that wording, and pointing out that it made it sound like you viewed yourself a survivor of situations that most times probably wouldn't have even required surviving in the least. For example, if your SO were to murder other people, than how does that make you a survivor? I know what it means to say metaphorically that you're a survivor. I still understood that you meant you'd choose yourself over them, but if you still think I don't get it, well, I'd like to believe I'm not so dumb that I wouldn't understand if you were to explain it to me.

Your exaggerated phrasing sounds like it's sarcasm, but then your comment afterward still pretty much fell into the same lines. So I don't think it was. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Hahahaha Uh it would depend, I mean if we made it all the way to her being my significant other, then YES, I would support them, but I would intervene and stop them from whatever destructive behavior by any means I could.

If they hurt or injured some one we have to work on that, and I would hold their hand every step of the way as we got help.

[Shadowferal]

If she was the love of my life, then I should know her...and know enough that if she feels the need to break the law then I would be right next to her giving her a hand.

[CritFromAfar]

If she was the love of my life, then I should know her...and know enough that if she feels the need to break the law then I would be right next to her giving her a hand.

Even with murder? I find it hard to believe that you would.

[callipygoustp]

Pimpin' ain't easy.

[Zython]

Depending on the crime, I would either be angry at them for committing it, defend them for committing it, or be angry at them for not inviting me to commit it with them.

[Nihilist74]

You have got to hope that you figure this out about this person as soon as possible. You then have to get away from them as soon as possible because they will drag you down with them. This goes for spouses, family members, boyfriends/girlfriends or friends. Even if you are not the one they are abusing or committing crimes against.

[InTheEnd]

If the bad behaviour is uncharacteristic and there is reasonable justification for doing it, then I'd stick by them. Otherwise, probably not.

[Lochton]

I've known some couples to do milder things like smoke weed together, but if your SO did something more severe, like stalk somebody, harass them, threaten their life, or try to hurt them, would you support them?

I've met some people that would put up with major problems, but then oddly enough end up dumping their SO for milder reasons, and I find that women will put up with way too much just to keep a relationship and the illusion that their SO isn't a bad person or that they wouldn't do anything like that.

Depending on the circumstances, I've seen people say that sometimes they'd be okay with doing bad things to others as long as it was for a good reason, even when it was pointed out how there's never a good reason. I know that when couples do these things together that they're more likely to be tight-knit, but I know that's likely not true for most couples, and not everyone shares the same idea of what's okay and not okay, so what would you all do if you found out that your SO did something horrible? Would you support them, depending on what it was, or would you disapprove and choose not to enable them no matter what?

Depends on the law. If something minor like illegal parking, eh, why not. Bank robbery, of course not.

[breadisfunny]

absolutely not.

- - - Updated - - -

I wear the pants in the family. If she's stalking, I'll put a stop to it.

well then your household is screwed.

- - - Updated - - -

What if the partner hid 20m in offshore account for you two to retire on after the sentence?

i would tell them where it is. i am all about law and order.

[Reaper0329]

Depends.

If my SO wanted to smoke a joint every now and again, I don't really care provided it doesn't get on my clothes and it's not in the car ever (my career would be shot if I was ever implicated in marijuana use, and NC treats possession as every occupant in the vehicle). If she started stealing or stalking or shot somebody though...that would be problematic.

Though honestly, it's such a foreign concept to me that imagining her doing anything like that is almost laughable.