Is having homosexual acts illegal in a country correct or incorrect?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Strydersroom said:
The point is simple: What two consenting adults, married or not, straight or gay, do in the privacy of their own home, platonic or sexual, is no one else’s business. The caveat being unless they’re running a meth lab, etc. Thus one can only speculate what “acts” if any are taking place, and thus can never legislate sexual morality/acts on said adults. And people wonder how the stereotype of religious sexual guilt is perpetuated. 🤷 from the should sodomy be illegal (which includes oral sex) to the recent doggy style mortal sin thread (yes that thread existed) people see completely obsessed over acts that are private and not their concern one iota. In my opinion.
Click to expand...
Ah! So why if it is no ones business talk about it in such detail time after time? Obsession yes?
 
Rosebud77 said:
The poster being mentioned here comes across as very unhappy from the times he claims he is happy. He clearly is not and the kind of relationship he is in can never be happy. Based on quicksand. I am in what you can call long term relationships with people of both sexes but they do not, cannot and never will include sex and a farcical “marriage”. They are relationships which are very good indeed, feed all of us and do not break the laws of God as known to Catholics. Oh and yes they hurt themselves and each other and yes, society
Click to expand...
Reported. I do not claim to be happy, I am very happy. I am quite offended by your "he clearly is not, and by calling my marriage farcical. You know what really hurts society? Insensitive, disrespectful and hurtful comments such as yours. Please stop.
 
PRmerger said:
Can you tell us why it’s illegal for a child to smoke tobacco? And for companies to advertise their tobacco? And why it’s banned in most restaurants?
Click to expand...
You are just confirming my claim that there is higher bar for making something illegal than it isn’t good for the human condition. Similarly, engaging in homosexual acts in a public park (as well as engaging in heterosexual acts in a public park) is illegal. But engaging in those same acts in private is not. And that is as it should be.
The idea seems to be, pretty much, because “it isn’t good for you”, no?
Click to expand...
Yes, that is the basis, but other factors come into play in addition to that basis, which is why smoking is illegal for children but not for adults.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
You are just confirming my claim that there is higher bar for making something illegal than it isn’t good for the human condition. Similarly, engaging in homosexual acts in a public park (as well as engaging in heterosexual acts in a public park) is illegal. But engaging in those same acts in private is not. And that is as it should be.

Yes, that is the basis, but other factors come into play in addition to that basis, which is why smoking is illegal for children but not for adults.
Click to expand...
So smoking is not bad for adults? and the analogy then is that homosexual acts are bad for you? Interesting…
 
simpleas said:
I couldn’t resist commenting on how you can say on an internet forum that someone ( Strydersroom) isn’t happy in their relationship…:confused:

What’s a serial adulterer? Someone who has multiple relationships while married, or just keeps having affairs while married? (one at a time)

Obviously, and IMO, a person like this is a unhappy person, but I can’t compare that to people who are in long term relationships, and have love for each other.
Click to expand...
LOL!

I hope you see the delicious irony here. You can tell when a person is unhappy based on their choices to indulge in immoral actions, but I can’t tell when a person is unhappy based on their choices to indulge in immoral actions.
The adulterer is or can hurt more than self. People in relationships are not hurting anyone.
Click to expand...
This ^^ is nonsensical until it’s explicated a bit more.
 
Strydersroom said:
The point is simple: What two consenting adults, married or not, straight or gay, do in the privacy of their own home, platonic or sexual, is no one else’s business.
Click to expand...
Really?

So a man cheating on his wife can say, “It’s no one’s business what I did with my neighbor. It was 2 consenting adults after all.”
 
LeafByNiggle said:
You are just confirming my claim that there is higher bar for making something illegal than it isn’t good for the human condition.
Click to expand...
Huh? What is the reason for making smoking illegal for children other than “it isn’t good for the human condition”?
 
PRmerger said:
Huh? What is the reason for making smoking illegal for children other than “it isn’t good for the human condition”?
Click to expand...
I can think of a number of reasons. One is that children are less able to make decisions relating to their own welfare. Another is that smoking is more damaging for a young person who has a long life ahead.

But returning to the original question about making homosexual acts illegal, doesn’t it seem like making anything that might be bad for you illegal is an instance of the Nanny State? Are you in favor of that? Or do you want government to allow people to make their own decisions in areas that only affect them? Laws are generally written to protect the rights of some people against the attacks of others. What two consenting people do in private in their bedroom does not attack anyone else’s rights.
 
Strydersroom said:
Reported. I do not claim to be happy, I am very happy. I am quite offended by your "he clearly is not, and by calling my marriage farcical. You know what really hurts society? Insensitive, disrespectful and hurtful comments such as yours. Please stop.
Click to expand...
Odd reply. But entirely predicatable. Praying deeply for you and by the way; please would you have the kindness and respect to stop repeating the same comment re bedrooms etc when you must know they are deeply offensive.I very rarely block posters but am sorely tempted. You know what we believe.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
But returning to the original question about making homosexual acts illegal, doesn’t it seem like making anything that might be bad for you illegal is an instance of the Nanny State?
Click to expand...
Yes. I agree.

I haven’t proposed that we make homosexual acts illegal.

What I am proposing is that we all understand that homosexual acts are immoral, and the desire to do such acts is disordered.
 
PRmerger said:
Yes. I agree.

I haven’t proposed that we make homosexual acts illegal.

What I am proposing is that we all understand that homosexual acts are immoral, and the desire to do such acts is disordered.
Click to expand...
And therein lies the rub. One can absolutely believe that such acts are immoral, but others may disagree completely, as I do. So the bottom line is that such acts therefore can never be deemed illegal or punishable by law, ever.

Just as some might think blind devotion to a religion, be it Christianity or Islam also disordered.

How about we start judging people by the content of their character and not what’s between their legs or what they do in their bedrooms.
 
Strydersroom said:
And therein lies the rub. One can absolutely believe that such acts are immoral, but others may disagree completely, as I do. So the bottom line is that such acts therefore can never be deemed illegal or punishable by law, ever.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. shrug
Just as some might think blind devotion to a religion, be it Christianity or Islam also disordered.
Click to expand...
You are very Catholic when you say that. 👍
How about we start judging people by the content of their character and not what’s between their legs or what they do in their bedrooms.
Click to expand...
LOL! What someone does in their bedrooms can indeed determine their character.

Or do you find adulterers to be morally upright folks?
 
PRmerger said:
Do you think someone who indulges in the type of disordered desire you’ve imagined can be healthy, mentally, spiritually, emotionally?
Click to expand...
Stryder: would you mind addressing the above question?

Do you think it’s healthy to indulge in a disordered desire?

Surely you can imagine some sort of desire that someone can be bizarrely attached to, yes?
 
PRmerger said:
Yes. I agree.

I haven’t proposed that we make homosexual acts illegal.
Click to expand...
Ahem! Let me refer to what you wrote in post #145:
The best secular argument for making homosexuality illegal is that it is bad for the human condition to indulge in a disordered desire.
That sure sounds to me like you are proposing that homosexual acts be made illegal. Or were you just saying there is a good argument for making them illegal, but you still wouldn’t actually want to make them illegal anyway?
What I am proposing is that we all understand that homosexual acts are immoral, and the desire to do such acts is disordered.
Click to expand...
Let me make this as clear as I can: I also think homosexual acts are immoral, disordered, and damaging to the people that do them. Yes, even damaging to their human condition. You don’t need to convince me. I already believe that. But making such acts illegal under civil law is ill-advised and an inappropriate use of the legal system, which should only be about protecting people from other people.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Ahem! Let me refer to what you wrote in post #145:
The best secular argument for making homosexuality illegal is that it is bad for the human condition to indulge in a disordered desire.
That sure sounds to me like you are proposing that homosexual be made illegal. Or were you just saying there is a good argument for making them illegal, but you still wouldn’t actually want to make them illegal anyway?
Click to expand...
I am saying that it’s a good argument for why it shouldn’t be accepted.
 
Lying is a sin. Not attending Mass is a sin.

But should it be a crime? Should it be outlawed? Do we want to bog down the justice system with such?
 
PRmerger said:
LOL!

I hope you see the delicious irony here. You can tell when a person is unhappy based on their choices to indulge in immoral actions, but I can’t tell when a person is unhappy based on their choices to indulge in immoral actions.

This ^^ is nonsensical until it’s explicated a bit more.
Click to expand...
No because I see it as an adulterer is someone who is having an affair, where as the ssc are in a committed relationship to each other.

We just see things differently regarding certain relationships that exist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top