Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Lois & Clark Fanfic FDK: Past Affairs

When you decide to think things over, you don't play softball, do you?

It's funny, but James and I were just discussing this the other day when we were reading "Oops" aloud. We decided that if one of them is married and one is single, it's adultery. If both are married, then it's not.

Still... I think coming under false pretenses is a nasty thing to do. IMO, and I think the OT backs it up, sex is not an action, it is an act of a covenant. Such things should not be taken lightly, but should be treated with honor.

Anywho, I hope life gives you a few breaks, and I hope you never give up the deep thinking you obviously did before writing this.

Elisabeth

Nothing like a little light philosophical discussion before dinner.

Your vignette didn't explain why Lois allowed herself to be intimate with the younger Clark. I have to assume that there was a valid reason, but without knowing what it was, it's difficult to give her a pass on it.

I have a larger problem believing that Clark would voluntarily go back and have "get-back" sex with a younger Lois. It just seems out of character for him, especially since his given reasons aren't positive. I've never been in that kind of situation, but I can't envision myself sleeping with a woman I wasn't married to in order to "even up" my wife's infidelity (which hasn't happened either).

As for the question "Is it cheating?" That's a hard one, but I'd have to cautiously come down on the "Yes, and it's wrong" side of the line. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but right now that's where I am.

Hey, don't let this dissuade you from posting stuff with an edge! There's room for everyone here, as long as we all approach the subject and the characters with respect. Thanks for a very different view of our favorite couple.

Hmm...Strange, I was sort of thinking the opposite.

My current theoretical interpretation on Love/Lust dynamics ---is that it's *who* you're with...what I mean, is:

I believe that we start out as one unit that gets broken into two pieces*, which are then scattered across time and space. When the two pieces find each other, that's marriage. When they find other pieces, that's adultery.

So, Lois can be with Clark at any age, and as long as its consensual, (IMHO), they're fine. It's when we get into body-swaps and parallel universes that things get iffy.

Hmm...does that at least make sense?

(*see Genesis for reference)

Hmm, interesting comments by all.

To Terry: Yes, everyone is acting out of character in this fic. I was mostly just interested in putting forth a scenario and seeing what other people thought of it.

I had a very difficult time for myself deciding whether or not something like this would constitute adultery or not.

On the one hand...it would be the same person (since I don't believe that you become a different person every time you wake up or every time you take a breath)...or would it?

I wasn't sure how to define "self". It's all well and good to say that one "self" comprises one "soul", but if in fact two versions of the same person (i.e. going back into the past and meeting yourself) could co-exist, would they have different "soul"s and therefore be different "selves"?

I assume most people would say that thoughts and emotions aren't what make a "soul" or a "self". I mean, theoretically if you replicated every last atom of a person...they would have the same thoughts, feelings, amd memories as the original. But noone would consider them to be the same person, and indeed, they would diverge relatively quickly as they had different life experiences.

So, I guess a question would be: Does coexistence imply discreteness? (not sure if discreteness is even a word. The important part is not confusing discrete with discreet)

Also, if something happens to a past version of someone (like in this scenario) and that something is remembered (because therefore it happened to them before) by a later version, that would imply some sort of link/connection between the two...so maybe having two separate bodies isn't enough to assume discreteness?

Is it possible for one "self" ("soul?") to have two separate brains? Two separate bodies?

Oh, and for anyone that was wondering, the idea for this was inspired by Zoomway's "The Persistence of Memory", in which lots of different versions of Lois and lots of different versions of Clark...er...*cough* *cough* *ahem*.