<p>Even if someone who believes they are infertile, opts to have sex with a married man, then it behooves her (and him) to use protection just in case. It is not the same as a married couple who believes one partner is infertile and so they don’t bother with birth control. In an affair where one person is married (to someone else), nobody should take any chance (no matter how remote) of getting pregnant, not to mention the need for protection for sexually transmitted diseases since at least one person is having sex with two partners conceivably.</p>
<p>No kidding.
I recently saw a friend from high school, who is a single mom with a child the same age as my youngest.
She didn’t have sex with a married man, but the father has had no contact with her or her child by their request as apparently he is an addict/pretty messed up.
( as was she I believe at the time of the pregnancy- + she didn’t use birth control because she didn’t think she could get pregnant)</p>
<p>I thought ? Even if you are going to make the bad choice of having sex with someone who is a druggie, wouldn’t it occur to you to make him use a condom? Even if you couldn’t get pregnant- how many other things can you get from him?</p>
<p>Even more sadly, is that her child has health concerns, which very well could be connected to her parents physical state at the time.</p>
<p>What the heck was her reasoning for going on Oprah? Purely for attention? Money? Her twisted attempt to “set the record straight” from her perspective? All fail to pass the “ick” fctor. Why doesn’t Oprah just have all the “girlfriends” of famous cheaters on at once and thet them compare golddigger strategies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Rielle stated that Elizabeth was so insistent that he deny it publicly because she truly believed he was not unfaithful to her. Rielle doesn’t have a lot of good things to say about Elizabeth, so I don’t know why she would lie about this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is true in regard to the baby. Elizabeth was very aware of the affair, she seems to be the only one not aware of the baby. It is all sordid.</p>
<p>I have also wondered why Oprah would fly to Charlotte and interview her in her home. That sort of treatment is usually for celebs. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Doesn’t this make you question all of “them”? He lied so effortlessly.</p>
<p>*I have also wondered why Oprah would fly to Charlotte and interview her in her home. That sort of treatment is usually for celebs. *</p>
<p>I thought it was because Oprah knew that her audience would not be sympathetic to her.</p>
<p>As for Rielle’s inability to have children…whether she thought so or not is not something any man should believe if children are not wanted. There are many, many children conceived when the parents thought themselves infertile.</p>
<p>^^ I guess you are right. There would have been far too much oohing and aahing if there were a live audience.</p>
<p>I read an excerpt and found it so annoying that she couches what she did in spirituality and psychobabble.</p>
<p>I read the GQ article and watched Oprah and I say both Johnny and Rielle are at fault here but Elizabeth is not fault free either.<br>
Apparently Rielle wasn’t the first “extra” for him so I place alot of it on HIS shoulders.</p>
<p>FWIW, I don’t believe Edwards would’ve been elected POTUS.</p>
<p>RH is one loopy person. Always has been. Enjoying the commotion and attention, I am sure. Edwards is going to pay even more dearly if he ends up with her. Deserves it. </p>
<p>Laxmom, I never believed Edward would’ve been elected as pres, either, even without this mess. But he would likely have taken a major role in government. Because of this scandal, he smells so bad that no one wants to even be in the same room with him,…except Rielle.</p>
<p>*I read an excerpt and found it so annoying that she couches what she did in spirituality and psychobabble. *</p>
<p>Exactly!! She should take a logic class.</p>
<p>Frankly, don’t we all know of some people like her (I don’t mean that we know someone who’s has had a child with a famous person). Don’t we all know someone who can circuitously use psycho-babble and distraction to justify the worst behavior? These people talk like pseudo-intellectuals trying to pull the wool over our eyes…but when you dissect what they’ve said, there’s no there there.</p>
<p>I did not see the interview with Oprah. But, I absolutely loved the New York Time’s take on it yesterday: </p>
<p>"Rielle Hunter, who told Oprah Winfrey in a program broadcast on Thursday that John Edwards had a secret affair with her because “he wanted to live a life of truth,” is a tough interview, tougher in some ways than President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran
ArtsBeat</p>
<p>Ms. Hunter and the Iranian president have a disconcerting way of saying preposterous things in a calm, complacent tone; both are serenely impervious to contradiction or sarcasm.</p>
<p>They aren’t exactly on the same danger grid, of course. Mr. Ahmadinejad’s plans for a nuclear arsenal are a threat to the security of the United States, whereas Ms. Hunter’s ambitions serve mostly as a cautionary parable for aspiring American presidents. But even the most experienced interviewers have a hard time breaking through their blinkered, immovable world views; if anything Mr. Ahmadinejad is a little easier to understand, because he uses translators."</p>
<p>*
Ms. Hunter and the Iranian president have a disconcerting way of saying preposterous things in a calm, complacent tone*</p>
<p>Exactly.</p>
<p>I think the problem with people like Rielle is that they haven’t had enough people in their lives calling them on their BS. When you regularly get the BS flag pulled on you, you learn.</p>
<p>This is one of those cases where you hope the kid is raised by a nanny…………</p>
<p>Never trust a guy who spends more than about a minute per week fussing with his hair.</p>