# Fiancé(e) has an undisclosed past in porn & prostitution. Deal-breaker, or water under the bridge? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 3, 2011, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267 "2011-01-03T21:51:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2011, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/61 "2011-01-04T21:25:47Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I am not aware of the verse where Jesus advised us to marry ex-junkies. Jesus also never said, “Men, do not fuck your stepdaughters.” It’s implied by other stuff. Likewise, I think “Judge not lest ye be judged” and his association with harlots and publicans are at odds with your attitude. > [@](#): > > I thought one of the tenets of a twelve-step program like NA was that you had dealt with the consequences of your drinking/using. Skipping the jurisdiction and leaving a warrant outstanding seems like an indication that perhaps one has not quite made it all the way thru the program. > > Regards, > Shodan Speaking as OP not poster: I tried to set up the timeline so that Terry hauled ass out of California before getting into rehab. Sorry if that wasn’t clear. In my defense, I tend to write those things over lunch. It’s a miracle I kept the names straight. Speaking as poster and not OP: [As to the Twelve Steps](http://www.cacradicalgrace.org/conferences/buw/12StepsOfNA.pdf), Eight & Nine seem most relevant here. I don’t think either requires Terry to volunteer herself for prosecution, as I disbelieve she was injuring persons other than herself. And even then, Step Nine would not always require that she make amends. Of course, she’d be well _advised_ to do so, but not as a requirement of recovery. > [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > I wonder what Jesus would have to say about Millionaire Matchmaker Patti Stanger’s idea of having your five non negotiables. I don’t know who that is. Anyway, I, of course, would mostly be concerned with Athena’s position. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2011, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/62 "2011-01-04T21:29:31Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > I don’t know who that is. Anyway, I, of course, would mostly be concerned with Athena’s position. 😉 She’s got a show on Bravo about setting up millionaires with people who just so happen to want to date millionaires. Non negotiables are things you don’t compromise on–like if you absolutely want to have kids and your partner doesn’t, that’s a deal breaker. For some, dating a former prostitute/porn actor/drug user might be a non negotiable. I don’t know if Jesus would approve. Athena, eh? I always pegged you as an Artemis man, myself. (She’s always been my favorite goddess.) ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2011, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/63 "2011-01-04T21:34:51Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Athena, eh? I always pegged you as an Artemis man, myself. (She’s always been my favorite goddess.) Your slight of great Pallas is very, ah, slight, but I’m still going to need you to rephrase the above so as to eliminate it entirely. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2011, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/64 "2011-01-04T22:42:00Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > Jesus also never said, “Men, do not fuck your stepdaughters.” It’s implied by other stuff. Likewise, I think “Judge not lest ye be judged” and his association with harlots and publicans are at odds with your attitude. I think the moral obligation to treat all people with charity, which I fully agree is one of Jesus’ core teachings, is different from any obligation to marry anyone. He told us to be “wise as serpents as well as innocent as doves”. As well as “Lead us not into temptation”. Marriage with the wrong partner is a serious mistake, all the more because marriage is intended to be life-long. I don’t think you are doing someone a wrong by not marrying them. And going ahead with a marriage out of guilt does not seem to me to be a good idea. YMMV. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2011, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/65 "2011-01-04T22:51:57Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I think the moral obligation to treat all people with charity, which I fully agree is one of Jesus’ core teachings, is different from any obligation to marry anyone. He told us to be “wise as serpents as well as innocent as doves”. > > As well as “Lead us not into temptation”. Marriage with the wrong partner is a serious mistake, all the more because marriage is intended to be life-long. > > I don’t think you are doing someone a wrong by not marrying them. And going ahead with a marriage out of guilt does not seem to me to be a good idea. It’s the warning against judging that I referred to. And of course the Golden Rule. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2011, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/66 "2011-01-04T23:32:09Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > It’s the warning against judging that I referred to. And of course the Golden Rule. I don’t think it is judging a person when you don’t marry them. Any more, that is, than everyone else you don’t marry. I am not saying Terry is a bad person. I am saying Terry is a person I don’t want to marry. Just like every other person I dated but didn’t marry. Is it a sin to not marry someone who is a former prostitute/porn star/junkie? Is it a sin to not marry someone because you find her laugh annoying? As I said, it does not seem to me that marrying someone is included in the definition of treating them charitably. And it is not judgmental to say “this person is probably not a good match”, even if it is because of something that squicks you out. I couldn’t marry a rabid atheist, and any number of Dopers have said they couldn’t be serious about someone who was religious. That doesn’t mean there is anything inherently judgmental about knowing that you cannot be happy with someone who is too different from you. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2011, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/67 "2011-01-05T14:08:44Z")
**Shodan** , the point here is that Sean has known Terry for quite a while and not found anything in his/her behavior to “squick him/her out.” Terry in no way behaves like someone who is or was a junkie, a porn star, or a prostitute. Terry has no physical traces of the past such as disease, and no personality traits or characteristics that would in any way suggest that s/he has ever been anything but a solid member of mainstream society. You may not believe that’s possible, but that is the hypothetical. So, you’re not rejecting Terry on the basis of any incompatibility. Terry is not different from Sean _now_. You’re rejecting Terry based entirely on his/her past history, and, I imagine, an ingrained belief that sooner or later Terry will revert to his/her sordid behavior of the past. And I get that. It’s probably the single biggest difference between conservatives and liberals I can think of. Conservatives tend to believe that people don’t change, and are disinclined to give second chances, even when they themselves or people close to them have turned their lives around. Liberals tend to believe that people can change and give them second (and third and fourth) chances even when presented with considerable evidence to the contrary (because, probably more often than not, people _don’t_ change). Both viewpoints are wrong, probably about equally often. As a result of this fundamental difference in approach, liberals often see conservatives as unkind and judgmental, and conservatives often see liberals as naive and unrealistic, not to say stupid. You’re a conservative, and most of the people here are liberal. To describe it in extreme terms, you believe in safety even at the risk of losing charity, and liberals believe in charity even at the risk of losing safety. Which is fine - each side has merit, each side has flaws. What you don’t get to do is choose safety and pass it off as perfectly charitable. There is nothing about Terry _now_ that Sean doesn’t like, no fundamental incompatibility. You used the fact that you wouldn’t want to marry an atheist, and an atheist wouldn’t want to marry you as an analogy. But the real comparison here is, would you want to marry someone who had once been a strong atheist but was now a true believer? Would an atheist want to marry someone who had once been devout but now was totally irreligious? ---
**Author:** ![TruCelt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/trucelt/32/523_2.png) [@TruCelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TruCelt)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2011, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267/68 "2011-01-05T18:13:43Z")
A. Even at the stage of making wedding plans Terry didn’t trust his partner enough to be fully honest, and B. There was an outstanding warrant which hadn’t been cleared or discussed. These two things indicate to me a high likelihood of future denial and secrets when Terrry makes a mistake. And people do make mistakes; the essence of character is in how/whether we respond to them. I’d foresee a lifetime of wondering how the car really got dented, or where Terry really was on Saturday night. Dealbreaker. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fiance-e-has-an-undisclosed-past-in-porn-prostitution-deal-breaker-or-water-under-the-bridge/566267.md?page=3)