I think adultery should be treated as some manner of tort, personally. I don't think most of the adultery laws that are currently on the books in states that still have them are very practical or well-considered. I doubt Virginia is an exception.
Seriously? That seems completely crazy.
Yeah, there is no way this could do any good.
I mean, the manner of treatment as such obviously shouldn't be like criminal conversation torts of old ('It was based upon compensation for the husband's loss of property rights in his wife, the wife being regarded as his chattel'--from Wikipedia. No. This is not a good basis for anything), and if there is seen to be no expedient way around the obvious practical problems then it is better to just let things be, but in principle I think it makes more sense as a tort than either legally non-actionable or a crime.
As has been said, adultery is a ground for divorce, and often affords better divorce conditions for the "injured party". I don't see how legislation could go father than that without making painful and oppressing human situations even more painful and oppressing.
Adultery should - in most cases - carry a social stigma. This is one of the situations where it's better for the State to step out and to let society do (while trying to correct the society's biases and prejudices, of course). I would also add that I can envision some situations where adultery is, everything considered, justified. Of course, these are situations where divorce should have already occurred.
