Is it wrong to break an immoral promise?

"Pay for it" in what respect?

How is "I promise that I will steal your wife" any different from "I promise to kill your wife"?

Heeven wrote:

In my eyes since the promise was to do an immoral act, the breaking of that promise is not morally wrong.

Then should we praise Albert for breaking his promise?

In that you must make the choice. Betry your promise to help rob the bank and suffer the retribution of the betrayed one, or rob the bank and suffer the imprisonment. In that respect. To live as an outlaw, or to never accept the validity of the betrayed one's anger is to avoid restoring your moral self. It is degenerating.

For one, there is no killing. That's one difference that is key. Does a man and a woman really own eachother? If I said to you that I wanted to kill your wife, then your wife would be your most powerful ally against me. If I said I would steal her you'd have to watch her too, to see if I was succeding. Maybe I should have specified that I meant "make your wife love me" when I said "steal".

Why should we praise Albert for anything? For not going through with the murder? While it is good that Albert did not commit murder, it seems if we were to praise him for backing out of it, we are treating him like a child. The fact is Albert "considered" doing the murder. That he later reneged on the promise, while being a good thing, does not entitle him to flowers thrown at his feet and our undying love and devotion (unless of course I happened to be the person he was promising to kill - I'm betting I would feel differently then!)