I think one such boundary that we should observe is that of privacy.

Okay. So we agree then. We do not install keyloggers unless trust is violated. If you do install keyloggers and find nothing, you apologize profusely. If you have reason to suspect adultery, then have at it.

Okay. So we agree then. We do not install keyloggers unless trust is violated. If you do install keyloggers and find nothing, you apologize profusely. If you have reason to suspect adultery, then have at it.

[quote=onefineday]
If something prevents her from picking me up at the airport, it's not a marriage-breaker. If she picks up a guy (or vice-versa) it well could be.

By using such deceitful means as recorders, keyloggers, programs, GPS, etc....aren't you being just as trust-breaking?

I am not trying to start an argument, just trying to understand the other side of the fence.

I'm on the side of the fence that feels that spying, using un-known and nearly undetectable means, is just as trust-breaking as committing the affair itself.

Okay. So we agree then. We do not install keyloggers unless trust is violated. If you do install keyloggers and find nothing, you apologize profusely.

However, if you are proven wrong, you remove them unless suspicion arises again for one reason or another. However, this does not mean install keyloggers whenever and for whatever reason you feel like simply because "there should be nothing to hide".

So one of the most common clues of an affair is an unwillingness to let a spouse investigate all aspects of life. If two lives are necessary for an affair, and if a spouse is curious enough, the secret second life is relatively easy to uncover. Difficulty in getting a spouse to talk about events of the day can be a sign of trying to hide the second life.

One of the most common smoke-screens used by unfaithful spouses is to express shock that their spouse would be so distrusting as to ask questions about their secret second life. They try to make it seem as if such questions are an affront to their dignity, and a sign of incredible disrespect. They figure that the best defense is a good offense, and so they try to make their spouses feel guilty about asking too many questions.

I am a firm believer in letting each spouse do as much snooping around as they want. Nothing should be kept secret in marriage, and no questions should be left unanswered. If a spouse objects to such scrutiny, what might he or she be hiding? here

Look what happened to poor Kathy Lee Gifford. She stated publicly and wrote in one of her books that she trusted her husband completely, that he would never cheat on her. But she should not have trusted her husband. If she would have taken the steps she is now taking to help him avoid another affair, the first would never have taken place, and she would have avoided all its pain and embarrassment. I don't trust my wife completely and she doesn't trust me, and that's why neither of us have ever had an affair. Lack of trust does not make spouses paranoid and miserable, it makes their marriages safe.

One topic is loss of trust. How can a spouse ever trust an unfaithful partner again? My answer is that the spouse should never have been trusted in the first place. I shouldn't be trusted by my wife, and I shouldn't trust her. The fact is that we are all wired for infidelity, and under certain conditions, we'll all do it. The way to protect your marriage from something that has been common to man (and women) for thousands of years is to recognize the threat, and do something to prevent it from happening. Basing a marriage on the Policy of Radical Honesty and the Policy of Joint Agreement goes a long way toward preventing an affair. Being each other's favorite leisure-time companions, and not being away from each other overnight are also important safety measures. Meeting each other's most important emotional needs, avoiding Love Busters and building an integrated lifestyle, free of secret second lives, are all ways to affair-proof your marriage. With these measures in place, we end up trusting our spouses because an affair becomes almost impossible to achieve.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I am genuinely interested in your point of view because these ideas are somewhat new to me, since I have always heard of the more traditional route of "trust" (which may not be correct).

Let me ask you guys a question then (and again I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to understand your points of view).. Do you think that our government should monitor everything that we do by installing keyloggers on all of our computers, tapping all of our phone conversations, installing GPS chips into our bodies, etc? Because the government can't trust that we will be good citizens, they have to make sure. And we shouldn't have any complaints about this.. after all, we're not going to be bombing anything, watching child porn, or committing any other illegal acts?

Do you think that our government should monitor everything that we do by installing keyloggers on all of our computers, tapping all of our phone conversations, installing GPS chips into our bodies, etc?

Do you think that our government should monitor everything that we do by installing keyloggers on all of our computers, tapping all of our phone conversations, installing GPS chips into our bodies, etc?