How do you politely refute the "I'm a good person argument"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lisa238
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
hunter2 said:
Explain, without resorting to myths, why pre-marital sex is wrong.
Click to expand...
Because sex is a promise you make with your body, to be faithful to that person for the rest of your life. But if there is no marriage, then the promise you are making with your body is a lie.

Also, outside of marriage, children are many times more likely to grow up in poverty and not to finish school - this is bad for society as a whole. Society needs well-adjusted citizens who have been properly brought up by two parents - which means that before having sex, the parents need to make a commitment to each other - this commitment, we call “marriage”.

Society can survive having a few people who are not well-adjusted, but when poverty and lack of education due to childbirth outside of wedlock become the norm, then society itself decays - people’s lives become hopeless, violent, and short. Which is not exactly “progressive,” is it?
 
hunter2 said:
What lowest common denominator? What the hell are you talking about. Extra-marital sex is not even remotely bad. Where do you get this stuff?.
Click to expand...
Do you even realize your on a Catholic forum?

Do you even have a hint as to what Catholics or Christians believe?

Have you ever even picked up a Bible, or sat in the pew of a Church, or talked to a Catholic or Christian about religon, or gone over the ten commandments? If you have ever done any of those things you wouldn’t dare think that extra marital sex is even remotely good…

You have proved the point I made in my last post, you have made your own goals for what being a good person is. You have set your own bar to a level that you are to comfortable with. Let God set the bar, and He will take you above and beyond your comfort zone. He sets the bar for true goodness, not you or me…
 
jmcrae said:
How is he “helping others” by having extra-marital sex? Instead, he is more likely to be wrecking people’s lives by transmitting various diseases to them, and getting people pregnant out of wedlock; not helping them.
Click to expand...

You aren’t very mature are you? You don’t GET people pregnant without their consent, unless you rape them. Women consent to the prospect that they might get pregnant. If you don’t promise each other anything, then the woman will have to deal with it herself, unless she has picked a good sex partner who will at least help her in any way he can. And don’t forget about surgeries that make procreation impossible.​

 
hunter2 said:

You aren’t very mature are you? You don’t GET people pregnant without their consent, unless you rape them. Women consent to the prospect that they might get pregnant. If you don’t promise each other anything, then the woman will have to deal with it herself, unless she has picked a good sex partner who will at least help her in any way he can. And don’t forget about surgeries that make procreation impossible.​

Click to expand...
So, extra-marital sex is just fine and dandy, and if anything goes wrong, it’s the woman’s fault.

OH, that sounds VERY moral, to me. :rolleyes:
 
hunter2 said:

You aren’t very mature are you? You don’t GET people pregnant without their consent, unless you rape them. Women consent to the prospect that they might get pregnant. If you don’t promise each other anything, then the woman will have to deal with it herself, unless she has picked a good sex partner who will at least help her in any way he can. And don’t forget about surgeries that make procreation impossible.​

Click to expand...
:confused: :confused: :confused:

All I can do at this point is shake my head in disbelief…:o
 
Wow, sorry, I didn’t think I was starting a thread about extra-marital sex.

Hunter2, if you are interested in debating the morality of extra-marital sex, please start a new thread to discuss it. I did not mean to bring up that topic, I was actually trying to make a point about how people sometimes try to justify almost anything by saying “I’m a good person so its ok if I do that”.

Otherwise, this is a great discussion and some very good points have been made. I’m interested in hearing more about my original topic if anyone has something to contribute.
 
lisa238 said:
Wow, sorry, I didn’t think I was starting a thread about extra-marital sex.

Hunter2, if you are interested in debating the morality of extra-marital sex, please start a new thread to discuss it. I did not mean to bring up that topic, I was actually trying to make a point about how people sometimes try to justify almost anything by saying “I’m a good person so its ok if I do that”.

Otherwise, this is a great discussion and some very good points have been made. I’m interested in hearing more about my original topic if anyone has something to contribute.
Click to expand...
Ok. the topic evolved from your topic. I will comply.
 
jmcrae said:
So, extra-marital sex is just fine and dandy, and if anything goes wrong, it’s the woman’s fault.

OH, that sounds VERY moral, to me. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You sound very immature. I did not say it was the “woman’s fault”.
 
hunter2 said:
And this is exactly why you should never actually talk. “good” is not defined by what is generally accepted. You have no morals if you think that is the case. Sex has been around for millions of years before “marriage” was invented. Societies started to develop systems for a secure environment for the perpetuation of the species,a system of rules to handle the granting of property rights, and the protection of bloodlines. The institution of marriage handled these needs. For instance, ancient Hebrew law required a man to become the husband of a deceased brother’s widow. These were just artificial rules to engineer society. Your superstitions cause you to be incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
That is because she had to be owned by someone. Even if they weren’t having sex or children. She could not inherit the house.
 
Jennifer123 said:
Yes it is. It certainly isn’t “good”.
Click to expand...
To end the “hijacking” of this post: pre-marital sex can be very good. Before you commit to each other, it is important to know if you are sexually compatible. And there is absolutely no moral component to just having sex. Sex is natural. Codified agreements are not necessary and certainly not natural. But if you feel the need to get it in writing, then by all means do.
 
hunter2 said:
To end the “hijacking” of this post: pre-marital sex can be very good. And there is absolutely no moral component to just having sex. Sex is natural. Codified agreements are not necessary and certainly not natural. But if you feel the need to get it in writing, then by all means do.
Click to expand...
So an act that’s considered “natural” is automatically moral? If I am “naturally” frustrated from a difficult day and I feel mad when a family member does something wrong later in the day, will it be moral if I “naturally” bop him on the head or curse at him? If I’m in a great mood and feel like whistling or jumping up and down during a theater movie, should I do it because it feels natural? No – I may be a generally good person, but doing these things are not “good” - it’s not okay for me to do them just because I feel like it.

Animals do “natural” acts – we humans have the additional gift of reason and self-control. Throughout time there have been moral codes addressing the wrongness of extramarital sex, for good reason.

By the way, your justifying extramarital sex in order to discern compatibility (as well as other comments) are simply ludicrous – but I’ll refrain from responding to them in this thread.
 
lisa238 said:
It seems like I repeatedly encounter people who don’t care about going to chuch or doing anything related to religion because they make the claim “I think if I try to be a good person I will be rewarded by a higher power in the afterlife.” Most of these people doubt that God exists, although they are not atheists.

Every time I hear this reasoning I get angry because I want them to be able to know God, and they seem to use this logic to justify all sorts of sins. For example, I had a boyfriend who used to say “It doesn’t matter if me touching you is a sin, because if we both try to be good people and we don’t go around killing people, we can still get to heaven.”

The way people try to say all they have to do is try to be “a good person” just drives me nuts, but I don’t want to start arguments over it. All I would like to do is gently explain to them why they need to do more then just try to be “a good person” and do some mild evangelization, but not enough to make them get overly defensive.
Click to expand...
I think part of the problem is people tend to use the word “good” in such a general, and distorted, way that it loses its meaning.

We tend to think we are “good” as long as we do not murder or rob a bank. But, being good really should mean being holy. The standard is not a mafia hitman or bank robber, but Christ.
 
fix said:
I think part of the problem is people tend to use the word “good” in such a general, and distorted, way that it loses its meaning.

We tend to think we are “good” as long as we do not murder or rob a bank. But, being good really should mean being holy. The standard is not a mafia hitman or bank robber, but Christ.
Click to expand...
:clapping: Exactly the point I was going to make. Good is a relative term. Looking around at hitmen, bank robbers, murderers, thieves, hookers, whatever, most of society can say they are good - as long as they aren’t doing what the obvious social outcasts are doing. We may be living up to the laws and “accepted” social mores which we all should do but it’s not really enough.

Good is a start but we are called to be holy; to be like Christ. In that context, when we compare ourselves to the right role model - the higher one, not the baser one - many of us don’t look so “good” anymore.
 
Don’t know how applicable this will be but…
An Ananlogy.

A man and woman concieve a child but, for whatever reason, they seperate. The child is born and raised by the mother in a loving home and knows about the father.
The Father is aware of the child and provides support for all the needs of the child.
The child never expresses interest in the father and doesn’t even acknowledge the support the father provides.
The child grows up, moves away from the mother lives a normal “Good” life. Marries and raises a family in turn.
Never does this child acknowledge the debt he owes tot he father for existance and sustinance.

The Child’s father dies.
Does the Child have any right to expect any inheritance?

I realize this is just rough. I’m just throwing it together before rushing out the door.
Heaven is an inheritance.
Unless we acknowledge, believe accept and obey Our Father how can we expect an inheritance?

Peace
James
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top