You know what people do NOT like to read about in the NY Times Vows? Homewreckers.

This weekend, the Vows section published the story of a man and a woman who met and fell in love while married to other people. Get this: they met at various events through their children’s school. Yowza.

The couple is unabashed about their controversial beginning, and NY Times commenters are equally unabashed in their criticisms. As of today, 139 mostly scathing critiques are on the site, including:

“So you’re telling me, as long as I’m happy, who cares what happens to my legally wedded spouse and kids? This story reeks of selfishness.”

“And this was news worthy why? My heart is breaking for these two families. Remind me again what is dishonest about keeping ones vows. Tell me again what the reason is for vows?”

“I suspect there are two people out there that eventually will meet Mr. Partilla and Ms Riddell when they least expect it–at a high school graduation, funeral, coronation or something and the cycle will repeat itself. Of course this time the woman will be ten years younger than Ms Rydell. I would have preferred a story about the jilted spouses–the

y must’ve been terrible people to deserve this.”

Wow, people are cynical!

What do you guys think? Should the Times be ashamed to have published this article? Or be congratulated for providing such an accurate portrait of the sometimes messy components of modern love?
[Carol Anne Riddell and John Partilla]

Filed Under: