[mmxiii]

There are a few things getting conflated here.

1. What the OP should do.

2. What the majority consensus is

3. How you subjectively feel about the majority consensus.

4. How the OP subjectively feels about the majority consensus.

In this case, there was not sufficient information given to really understand what the majority consensus is. Additionally, just because something is the consensus, doesn't mean it is necessarily the best course of action individually. Facing condemnation is a consequence, not physical law. The initial response took no time to give an appropriate course of action, and drew on your subjective heated feelings attached to your interpretation of the consensus.

[crimsonalucard]

>In this case, there was not sufficient information given to really understand what the majority consensus is. Additionally, just because something is the consensus, doesn't mean it is necessarily the best course of action individually. Facing condemnation is a consequence, not physical law. The initial response took no time to give an appropriate course of action, and drew on your subjective heated feelings attached to your interpretation of the consensus.

There is no need to do a scientific analysis to derive majority consensus. Intuition is enough to know what the majority thinks about stealing your best friends girlfriend. Whether or not the majority consensus is the "best" course of action for the individual is not what I addressed. I specifically stated that my advice was from a moral standpoint, whether or not the OP considers that as "best" depends on whether or not he is a moral man.

The initial response gave a appropriate course of action from a moral standpoint. It drew from a combination of sources all of which can be potentially described as subjective, moral, rational, emotional, heated yet still valid.

[mmxiii]

It's fine to use intuition, but it's extremely important to be able to reflect and recognize on its shortcomings, which is that you may be inadvertently layering your own subjectivity on what you think is objective. In this case your outburst is not valid.

Is forcing yourself on another person immoral? Yes. Is intentionally manipulating someone's relationship for personal gain immoral? Yes. Are two people recognizing they would be happier together, and leaving a previous relationship immoral? That doesn't seem wrong.

You are the one coloring this scenario as "stealing". There is no information here about who these people are, what their relationships are like. You are projecting onto this situation and constructing this strawman, and in turn moralizing about the strawman. That isn't reality.

[DanBC]

> stealing your best friends girlfriend.

She's not property that belongs to someone.

She's presumably an adult who can make her own choices.