No and No; and No. Not ever in any circumstance is it advisable to act with anything but honesty and integrity. In love, underhand behaviour may win the woman, but it does not bode well for a long-term relationship. In the not too distant past a man guilty of such conduct (taking advantage of a lady) would be denounced as a cad and a bounder (ungentlemanly behaviour). This would even be the case resulting from ‘breach of promise’ and a betrayal of betrothal (to engage with a promise to marry). Teaching children about courtesy and good-manners, right and wrong, and the value of morals are essential building blocks in the foundation years before their seventh birthday; and would pay handsome dividends. These concepts may seem to be old-fashioned in todays permissive culture, but society could surely benefit by going back to the future. It is incumbent on everyone to set a good example. Bad behaviour must not be tolerated, and certainly not celebrated. The introduction of a Code of Chivalry in to all educational establishments is urgent and vital. Connect that bad behaviour with politics and it is a recipe for disadvancement and a potential disaster for the general public wellbeing. Any politician who serially cheats on his wife, will cheat on the country and is not to be trusted and considered Prime Ministerial material.
‘If I believe it, it is true’. This seems to be the prevailing attitude in today’s self-centred society. This attitude is promoted by people who should know better and it is dangerous because it undermines our democracy and results in a divisive society. Democracy can only function by application of the cardinal virtues that are underpinned by the truth. In the absence of revelation truth must be absolute, factual and objective. Much of what is said and written is opinion, and opinion without evidence is nothing more than bigotry and prejudice.
Our memories of events can play tricks on us, especially as time goes by. Police investigators know that four witnesses to an incident will recount four different versions of what happened and believe they are telling the truth. So it is only the bits they agree on that can be relied on. This is a simple fact of life. If all four say they did not witness anything because they were not there, then it must be concluded it never happened. This is the situation with Professor Ford’s allegations of sexual assault made against Judge Kavanaugh. Compelling (if unbelievable) though her testimony was, and despite the Judge’s willingness to forgive injuries and bear wrongs patiently on the basis that she was mixed up and mistaken, this is not a situation of false memories after thirty-five years being retrieved during a course of therapy. Professor Ford, due to her education, training and profession, knew exactly what she was doing. Even though Judge Kavanaugh has been exonerated, the mass of people who still believe her describe her as a survivor of sexual abuse and a victim. She may have experienced some other assault, but it is certain that she is a victim. A victim of misuse by activist political lawyers affiliated with the US Democratic Party.