Chris Martin calls out couple!

[Loopylooni]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-14914293/Chris-Martin-couple-camera-affair-Coldplay-concert-Boston.html

Cringe!

Stick your head in the sand then? The BBC is financed via license fees and therefore has a public duty to keep license fee payers up to date on world events, not gossip. Sadly the whole BBC News app is now full of this kind of tripe. As for the people claiming that it's a valuable lesson on appropriate sexual conduct at work, there are HR training modules that cover this.

He did not has his hands on her breasts. His arms were around her beneath her breasts. She had her hands on top of his hands, which looked like she has her hand on her own breast. There was no other members of staff with them.

If what you meant was under the law, then yes and nobody said otherwise, nor have you unequivocally confirmed that's what you meant. If indeed that's what it was about, you should have made that clear, so you can stop congratulating yourself for your failure to articulate your thoughts clearly.
Btw, abuse in and of itself is not a criminal act, the type of abuse that is a physical assault is. Abuse is much a broader than physical assault.

How so?

Well in countries where extramarital sex is illegal, and adultery punishable by death or stoning, it is always the women who come of worst as men will always protect each other. I think going down that road is dangerous and regressive. We have thankfully just moved to no fault divorce, it seems a very backwards step to be suggesting couples start linking financial arrangements to behaviour (and suing somebody will of course have the same affect as using the divorce settlement for revenge)

We're talking about two different concepts here. One is about using divorce court to get revenge, which as I said, is not something I would favour. The other is about getting compensation for pain and suffering. Why should your spouse be immune from being sued for doing you harm?
That's nothing to do with religious morality. If you're going to apply that reasoning you might as well apply it to any kind of suit for damages.

I think you've been watching too much dystopian drama.

But obviously if you can sue each other for behaviour during the marriage the effect is no different from making the financial settlement dependent on behaviour. Honestly if you dont have the imagination to see where it could lead, and there examples of this stuff all over the world, I dont know what else to say.

In other words you are using a slippery slope argument (fallacious enough in itself) without even offering examples. If you cannot justify your claims, that is on you, not me.

It's not the same effect. A financial settlement in a divorce is not paying damages for harm, it's about a fair distribution of assets. A suit for damages would be completely separate from a divorce settlement.

It's clear that some people have an axe to grind. What if you end up cheating because your partner abuses you emotionally day in and day out? (Yes, I know you could end the marriage, but is it always that easy?) Then who should pay damages? Slippery slope as someone said upthread. Personally, I'm glad that times have moved on.

Then of course you should be able to sue him. If he genuinely abused you he broke his vows to love and cherish, so the vows then became null and void. Therefore you didn't actually break the agreement and he shouldn't be able to get damages for it.

But the effect would be the same. The assets would be shared followed by a lengthy process of suing each other for harm and if you cheated you would have less money than the non cheating partner.
What if they both cheated on each other? What would the time limitation be? How would you prove it? What about other sorts of harm? Must it be penetrative sex? If not what counts as cheating? What about same sex couples? What about emotional cheating? What about couples who aren't married? What if they have an open marriage but one party breaks the pre arranged rules on when and how it happens, are there any mitigating factors like absence of sex or emotional neglect in the marriage? People can hurt each other in many ways in a marriage, I think it is ridiculous to suggest that courts should have to act as arbitrator in who did what and who caused the most hurt and somehow link this to an amount of money. We have laws to deal with criminal cases of abuse including now coercive control. Difficult and hurtful as it can be I think it is very wrong for anybody outside of the couples involved to be policing consensual sex between adults.

You must be looking at a different photo to me.