I am a single woman in my mid-20s. I recently learned from my dear friend that she has developed a longtime pattern of cheating on her husband of five years. I understand cheating happens for various reasons — but if I remain friends with her, am I condoning her ongoing behavior? If I am “anti-compulsive-cheating,” do I therefore have to be anti-her? I value many aspects of our friendship but don’t see her (or my) views on philandering ever changing. EVE, HOUSTONIt’s totally fine to have friends whose values oppose your own. Having relationships with people does not condone everything they do. You can be intimately involved with a person and still view the quality of his or her thoughts and actions with objective distance.Now, that changes if you become tangibly involved with unethical acts: if you provide cover for deception, if you help people lie or if you tell them their infidelity is justified (even though you believe it isn’t) — then you’re complicit. But that’s not what’s happening here. What’s happening is that someone you care about is doing something problematic and has selected you as her confidante (despite the obvious risk in doing so). This reflects positively on you as an individual. And as long you stay within your own value system — as long as you do nothing or say nothing that contradicts whatever you consider the better way to live — the friendship is valid.You claim your friend’s views on philandering will not change. You’re probably right. They probably won’t. Maybe she doesn’t even think what she’s doing is particularly wrong. But in all likelihood, she knows it’s wrong (but does it anyway). Abruptly ending your friendship won’t have any impact on her cheating; she will just assume that you’re self-righteous or that she’d be better off keeping her secrets to herself in the future. If you stay in her life, however, you might be able to show her a different way to live and think. Tell her that learning of her infidelities made you question the merit of your friendship. Make it clear that you see her behavior as wrong but that you would not socially discard her over this difference. If she ever asks your advice, tell her to stop cheating on her husband (or to at least be honest with her husband about how she chooses to live).Don’t end a friendship because someone acts in a way you never would. Part of being a good person is being open to people who are not so good, and part of being a friend is making flawed acquaintances feel as if they can tell you about their flaws (without fear of abandonment or persecution). In fact, if you’re the type of person who wants to associate exclusively with those who perfectly mirror your own ethical worldview, you’re reducing significantly the scope of your potential life experience.

In this post from The Ethicist, a woman shares that she discovered the fact that her friend has been cheating on her husband. This woman is completely against cheating and now she doubts whether or not she should be against her friend. At a first glance, my initial thought was that you can always have a friendship and have disagreements or different opinions about something. Even if you are against something your friend does, I think that, at the end of the day, you just mutually support each other. One doesn't necessarily have to understand or like what the other person is doing, but just respecting the fact that it's their choice and not your own. On the other hand, when a friendship is close enough, you should be able to voice your opinions just to offer your friend another point of view. 
One of the first ways of knowing that I thought of when reading this post was language. The way this woman wrote the post and asked the question makes a huge difference: she uses the word cheating. "Cheating" holds a very strong, negative connotation and makes most people immediately think of something bad and overall wrong. However, the "cheater" in this situation, probably describes it with words that have another connotation in order to make it seem less severe. At the end of the day, sugarcoating the story doesn't change the action, but it will probably make the "cheater" feel less guilty if she uses nicer words and it will probably make the writer feel even more upset if she uses strong, negative words. The next way of knowing I thought of is reason. Anyone can support a statement with arguments that could be reasonable or unreasonable. The way this woman describes the situation, by saying "cheating happens for various reasons" already shows how arguments can influence you to think differently about a situation. The "cheater" probably defended herself with excuses and reasonable statements, on the other hand, the friend might've thought of so many counterarguments given that she is against the practice of adultery. In other words, the way you set up a conversation, with the use of language and reasoning, can change the meaning of the situation completely. The way that the friend told the story was probably a lot different than the way the other friend received the story given that they have such different views on the topic. 
Another important aspect to analyze is emotion. The woman who is cheating is probably emotionally attached and thus defending herself in a biased way. On the other hand, her friend is learning about this with a negative perspective on the act of cheating and thinking about her own ethics as well as the defined morals. The morals defined by society are that cheating is wrong and this could differ in someone's personal ethical views. To the woman who wrote this question, cheating is wrong and she is analyzing the situation with that perspective in mind. However, just because the friend is cheating doesn't mean she finds it acceptable–she might be so emotionally involved making her biased and causing her to forget her own principles. Even if two people in a friendship have different ethics, however, shouldn't they respect each other's principles? I think all of this includes the social sciences because you can go further by analyzing the way they were raised. Maybe one of them was exposed to cheating and that has shaped their perception (maybe it is something they are accustomed to or repelled by). Maybe religious doctrines and morals put up by their society influence the way they perceive this situation. I think that there is so much more to this problem, given that we, as readers, don't know either of the woman involved.
With all of this said, my personal belief is that a friendship means mutual support and respect for each other. Thus, even if there is a clash of ethics or disagreement, one puts judgements aside to help a friend. With that said, I also believe that the woman who wrote this question is allowed to give her opinion and show her friend why she thinks it might be wrong at the same time that she supports her. Just because you are against something doesn't necessarily mean you would dislike everyone who is for it. After reading what Chuck Klosterman answered, I mostly agree with him. As long as you know how to separate and keep your own ethics, you can still be friends with someone who has a different opinion. And if someone tries to involve you in something you don't believe in, know how to keep your distance from that and be strong to say no. My personal opinion is that there is emotional attachment in the friendship that you probably can't get rid of, no matter the difference in opinion you may have.