Beards and Gay Marriage

[stewstew03]

What you appear to be doing is inserting your own interpretations of what you want to be the intentions of SSM advocates and not something they themselves are advocating.

To my knowledge SSM activists are fighting for legal issues which do not include incest.

“And if gay sex is ok because, then why can’t incest be ok?” is a question from your own interpretation of intent and principle which I don’t share. My interpretation has been clearly stated.

If you are looking for a moral reason, I am sure that the CC has a taboo on incest why not look it up for yourself? I follow the moral principles of the UCC and they have a moral reasons to preclude incest as I believe most other religions and demoninations have.

The purpose of bringing up other relationships like incest is to demonstrate that redefining marriage ends up destroying marriage.

 

[PRmerger]

“And if gay sex is ok because, then why can’t incest be ok?” is a question from your own interpretation of intent and principle which I don’t share. My interpretation has been clearly stated.

Could you re-state your position again, as the moral law is concerned?

Remember, we are not talking legal issues here but rather morality.

So how do you argue for gay sex while arguing against incestuous sex?

 

[frobert]

Could you re-state your position again, as the moral law is concerned?

Remember, we are not talking legal issues here but rather morality.

So how do you argue for gay sex while arguing against incestuous sex?

I follow the UCC moral principles if you are truly interested in what they are you are welcome to review them here… This is a library and comprises many other links.

If you are strictly talking to the moral issues of SSM advocates you are still inserting your own interpretations of their moral convictions by inferring that they are pro incest. Nothing prevents you from contacting them (SSM advocates) and ask them specifically if they are pro incest.

I am not arguing gay sex you are trying to argue it by implying that morally there is no difference between gay sex and incest. The only way that they are alike is that the CC believes that the end justifies the means and the only end that the CC deems correct is procreation. Not all religions believe that the end justifies the means.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

To my knowledge SSM activists are fighting for legal issues which do not include incest.

You haven’t answered PR’s question.

“What’s the moral principle that permits one but forbids the other, frobert?”

 

[stewstew03]

…
If you are strictly talking to the moral issues of SSM advocates you are still inserting your own interpretations of their moral convictions by inferring that they are pro incest. Nothing prevents you from contacting them (SSM advocates) and ask them specifically if they are pro incest.

I am not arguing gay sex you are trying to argue it by implying that morally there is no difference between gay sex and incest. The only way that they are alike is that the CC believes that the end justifies the means and the only end that the CC deems correct is procreation. Not all religions believe that the end justifies the means.

You have misunderstood the argument.

It is not:

“SSM advocates are in favor of incestuous marriages.”

It is:

“SSM advocates are in favor of redefining marriage as something different than the traditional, conjugal view. Therefore, marriage becomes open to a host of definitions – polyamorous, incestuous, practical arrangements, etc.”

 

[PRmerger]

I follow the UCC moral principles if you are truly interested in what they are you are welcome to review them here… This is a library and comprises many other links.

Could you please articulate your position in a few sentences?

What is the moral argument for gay sex that would also forbid incestuous sex?

I don’t really think this ought to be that difficult.

Please use your own words so I know that you understand it, and are not simply blindly following someone.

 

[frobert]

You haven’t answered PR’s question.

“What’s the moral principle that permits one but forbids the other, frobert?”

That is a good question. Do I really need to give a moral answer to something that is really not an issue for anyone except for the people who are trying to connect SSM and incest. I believe that the real moral issue is with why you are trying so hard to do so.

I am not qualified to answer moral issues and prefer not to give my interpretations which will be nitpicked by others who do not share the same moral convictions as I do. I can only refer you to my Church’s references. If you are so interested in them why do you resist so strenuously checking them out for yourself

Indeed, I made an error in my previous post by linking sex acts with incest based on procreation. On reflection I realized that incest can result in procreation.

 

[frobert]

Could you please articulate your position in a few sentences?

What is the moral argument for gay sex that would also forbid incestuous sex?

I don’t really think this ought to be that difficult.

Please use your own words so I know that you understand it, and are not simply blindly following someone.

See my previous post

See ethics against incest

 

[frobert]

Could you please articulate your position in a few sentences?

I changed my mind. I am going to answer your question not from a moral perspective but as a knowledgeable, trained and experienced psychotherapist who treated both perpetrators and victims of incest.

Briefly, the incest is mostly abusive and severe scars on the victim that will never be healed. Incest is frequently a gift that doesn’t stop giving (It is passed down from one generation to another.)

I have not treated sibling incest but do know of cases where brothers have been sexually intimate usually in an abusive relationship. The damage was not as severe in them but none-the-less it was there.

So I leave the moral principles up to you and say I am against incest because the real and potential damage it creates which one does not find in consensual adult relationships and SSM.

Now please forgive me if I refuse to be part of an absurd argument that SSM and incest are morally equivalent.

 

[stewstew03]

I changed my mind. I am going to answer your question not from a moral perspective but as a knowledgeable, trained and experienced psychotherapist who treated both perpetrators and victims of incest.

Briefly, the incest is mostly abusive and severe scars on the victim that will never be healed. Incest is frequently a gift that doesn’t stop giving (It is passed down from one generation to another.)

I have not treated sibling incest but do know of cases where brothers have been sexually intimate usually in an abusive relationship. The damage was not as severe in them but none-the-less it was there.

So I leave the moral principles up to you and say I am against incest because the real and potential damage it creates which one does not find in consensual adult relationships and SSM.

Now please forgive me if I refuse to be part of an absurd argument that SSM and incest are morally equivalent.

You are addressing abuse, and probably children. You haven’t addressed the issue of adult, consensual incest.

 

[PRmerger]

You are addressing abuse, and probably children. You haven’t addressed the issue of adult, consensual incest.

Yep.

I think that after asking frobert at least 4 times to offer his arguments against incest while also permitting gay sex and he has not been able to offer a coherent response…the point has been made.

IOW: frobert, you cannot argue morally for gay sex without also arguing for adult, consensual incest.

There is no logical moral reason that gay sex should be permissible but adult consensual incest should not.

At least, if one follows the logic to its end.

 

[frobert]

Yep.

I think that after asking frobert at least 4 times to offer his arguments against incest while also permitting gay sex and he has not been able to offer a coherent response…the point has been made.

IOW: frobert, you cannot argue morally for gay sex without also arguing for adult, consensual incest.

There is no logical moral reason that gay sex should be permissible but adult consensual incest should not.

At least, if one follows the logic to its end.

Interesting on how everyone is so interested in my moral opinion after I told you that I am not qualified to argue morals. Its amazing what strange ideas some people have. I told you that my argument against has to do abuse based on psychological grounds which I am qualified to discuss which is not good enough for you. Whether adult/child or adult/adult incest there is abuse.

If you wish to argue that incest and SSM are morally equivalent that is your prerogative which I find it quite entertaining and amusing.

For me the argument is grasping at straws for who knows what reason, because from a psychological perspective it is absurd.

 

[PRmerger]

Interesting on how everyone is so interested in my moral opinion after I told you that I am not qualified to argue morals.

That’s too bad, frobert.

I wonder whether your children, when you tell them, “You cheated on your spelling test and that is not a good thing to do!” will respond with, “Well, since you’re not qualified to argue morals, I’m not sure I believe that it’s wrong to cheat on my spelling test.”

And when you tell your wife, “You cheated on me and that is wrong!” she will respond, “Since you’re not qualified to argue morals, so how can you tell me that’s wrong!”

(Note to those prone to histrionics: the above is rhetorical only).

And when you tell your clients, “It was wrong of you to tell people that I overcharged you.” they’re simply going to say, "Since you’re not qualified to argue morals, how can you tell me it’s wrong?

Nope. I know that you know that you are eminently qualified, as any rational person is, to argue morals.

You just have come to understand that your position that gay sex is okay but consensual incestuous adult sex is not ok…is simply untenable.

 

[stewstew03]

Interesting on how everyone is so interested in my moral opinion after I told you that I am not qualified to argue morals. Its amazing what strange ideas some people have. I told you that my argument against has to do abuse based on psychological grounds which I am qualified to discuss which is not good enough for you. Whether adult/child or adult/adult incest there is abuse.

If you wish to argue that incest and SSM are morally equivalent that is your prerogative which I find it quite entertaining and amusing.

For me the argument is grasping at straws for who knows what reason, because from a psychological perspective it is absurd.

If you accept that adult/adult consensual sex constitutes abuse, then you must also accept the possibility that male/male or female/female consensual sex constitutes abuse.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Now please forgive me if I refuse to be part of an absurd argument that SSM and incest are morally equivalent.

At any rate, you haven’t proven why the advocate for incestuous marriage shouldn’t have the same right as the SSM consenting adults.

You are calling incest a psychological disease, while refusing to call sodomy a psychological disease?

While many people are so politically correct as to stop labeling sodomites as psychologically diseased, that has not been the attitude of the human race from the dawn of recorded history.

Just because the demand is made more strenuously and successfully to define sodomy as a life style rather than a disease, it does not follow that it has ceased to be a psychological disease.

The absurdity of incestuous marriage should really be eclipsed by the absurdity of SSM.

Our ancestors would be ashamed of us.

 

[frobert]

You are calling incest a psychological disease, while refusing to call sodomy a psychological disease?

Incest is not a psychological disease. Incest is illegal. Incest, whether adult or child almost universally involves abuse and results in life long emotional scars.

Their are historical connotations of same sex to sodomy. As used in the bible sodomy is a catch all phase for many different types of sex acts. You will have to tell me if I am right but I think the CC still considers same sex as sodomy. The UCC and some other religions and denominations do not. Please be respectful.

 

[frobert]

If you accept that adult/adult consensual sex constitutes abuse, then you must also accept the possibility that male/male or female/female consensual sex constitutes abuse.

Adult/adult incest whether consensual or not is abusive. There is almost always an inequality or authority factor involved which is not usually the case with same sex. For further information please consult the literature on incest. I provided a link to ethics and incest above. You can also search on psychological factors involve with incest.

 

[frobert]

IOW: frobert, you cannot argue morally for gay sex without also arguing for adult, consensual incest.

You are entitled to your opinions. I provided you with references to the moral codes of the UCC where the UCC has gone into detail as to their moral perspective on SSM. If that is not good enough for you so be it. Once before you goaded me into answering a poster. Please excuse me if I don’t wish to repeat that experience.

 

[PRmerger]

You are entitled to your opinions. I provided you with references to the moral codes of the UCC where the UCC has moral reasons for SSM. If that is not good enough for you so be it. Once before you goaded me into answering a poster. Please excuse me if I don’t wish to repeat that experience.

And yet you cannot express this argument in your own words…

Suddenly, when asked, you’re not qualified to speak about morality.

 

[frobert]

And yet you cannot express this argument in your own words…

Suddenly, when asked, you’re not qualified to speak about morality.

Still goading!!! Tell us, what your motive is? Is it personal? Looking for a gotcha moment?Something else? What differences does it make that my opinion is that incest and SSM are not morally equivalent? Why is my opinion so important to you?

You really have my curiosity on a treadmill.