T
Thorolfr
Guest
What kinds of immoral acts done with consent are you thinking of? Don’t forget, that you can’t include acts that are harmful or in which real informed consent cannot be given (such as by children or animals).
- Status
C
cena
Guest
Two adult close relatives
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
It is interesting that arguments against what Girgis, George and Anderson have to say always boil down to an appeal to emotion or deprivation, thus completely sidestepping the argument itself or trivializing their points by the appeal to sympathy, pity or ad misericordiam.
It is the same appeal that has consistently eroded moral standards over the past 50 years. How would you feel if…?
The same appeal, in fact, that brought on no fault divorce and made marital commitments merely those of “How would you feel if…?”
Sure, they made a vow to each other and their children to remain faithful and caring, but, well… Things just didn’t work out.
Funny how those considerations don’t apply when, for example, money is lost on the stock market. How would you feel if you invested $20 000 on that stock and it tanked? Well, let’s get the government to step in and compensate you for the loss, you poor thing!"
Neither are similar “feelings” appealed to when someone is contractually obligated to repaying money and they fail to. Oh, he didn’t mean to sign the contract… Let’s let him off. No fault - we should all step in and repay the one owed the money.
Where children or sex are involved. We can find all kinds of excuses. Adults should not be held accountable in those areas. No, no! Let’s get the government to take responsibility in all cases involving sex and children.
After all, adults should not be responsible for their sexual feelings nor their behaviour. Sexual attractions are beyond anyone’s control after all.
Contraception, abortion, sexual indulgence, it is a free-for-all where sex is concerned because NO ONE should be held accountable for that!
We are all adults, here!
Big crying babies, more like, who will do anything to indulge ourselves. :crying:
Let’s grow up, shall we and stop this regression to infantilism before it’s too late.
The pity party is over as far as I am concerned.
R
Rau
Guest
I’m sure the answer will be an exercise in circular reasoning, eg. “Incest is illegal, and just wrong!”
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Funny how we don’t require consent from animals when we slaughter them and make hamburgers or stew.
I suspect this argument about bestiality will be next to be dismantled by progressives using roughly that point.
We are circling a black hole of immorality. The only thing that keeps us from being sucked in is the vestige of Christian principles, but those are slowly being eroded by the prodding and prompting around the edges.
We need to wake up and resist for the sake of resisting while we get our moral feet back under us.
T
Thorolfr
Guest
C
cena
Guest
Did you know Abraham had an affair with Sarah’ s servant? I guess that means adultery is okay if the wife consents.
You still didn’t answer my question what is the dividing line, what makes incest wrong but homosexual acts okay.
C
clem456
Guest
What kinds?
Deception. It is frequently done with consent. In fact it thrives on consent.
Why is it wrong for me to claim I am a woman and be treated as such when indeed I have a male body? I want my rights.
Why is it wrong for me to claim I am a professional basketball and should be treated as such when I in fact am 5’8" and have a vertical leap of 14 1/2 inches? Where’s my 10 mil? I am a playa, I feel it in my bones, my friends all support me. I want my rights.
Why is it wrong for me to claim I have a relationship with J-Lo when in fact I am married? I feel it, I really do. I have a right to live in happiness with my love(s).
C
clem456
Guest
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Actually Hagar was Abraham’s wife:
Abraham practiced polygamy and had more than one wife like many men in the Old Testament.
E
edwest2
Guest
Minus your last sentence, I totally agree. A deception is being marketed and it’s legality is based on taking the uniqueness out of marriage. Marriage is not just a contract. It’s uniqueness must be preserved to avoid people wrongly believing that marriage can be almost anything.Continually evading the very simple issue. The issue isn’t that some hetero couples can’t have children due to infertility, the issue is deception. It is deceptive to claim the institution and vocation of marriage is not unique. It is deception to claim a gay union is the same as marriage and should be treated the same, when it is not the same.
One does not even have to get tied up in a knot about sodomy and men kissing one another to see the problem.
That issue goes forever evaded. Some will agree that only men and women can produce children, but then reduce that profound reality to the level of feelings, emotions, finances, inheritances, and sexual practices, all the other things of a relationship.
But, I can have all those things with my brother, my dog, my best friends grandmother, and Barack Obama, and still not create a human being with them.
Reducing human existence to damn near nothing.
Ed
C
cena
Guest
So polygamy is okay because Abraham and others practiced it. It’s not like Jesus complained about “the hardness of heart” of the Jewish men and how that was the reason Moses let them get a divorce. It’s not like Jesus said getting a divorce and remarried is adultery or anything.
C
cena
Guest
You still didn’t answer my question. Where is the dividing line. Who makes the dividing line?
T
Thorolfr
Guest
What are you bringing up divorce for? Jesus doesn’t say anything that forbids polygamy, only getting divorced and remarried. Many men in the Old Testament had more than one wife: Abraham had Sarah and Hagar; Jacob married Rachel and Leah; Samuel’s father Elkanah had two wives, Hannah and Peninnah; David had many wives; Solomon had 700 wives.
C
clem456
Guest
Can it simply be agreed that incest and homosexuality are two different things by definition?
(Careful, you might make a good argument for the uniqueness of marriage…)
(Careful, you might make a good argument for the uniqueness of marriage…
)
C
cena
Guest
My question is why is one moral and the immoral.Can it simply be agreed that incest and homosexuality are two different things by definition?
(Careful, you might make a good argument for the uniqueness of marriage…
C
cena
Guest
People who get a divorce and remarry assume that their first marriage is over and their second marriage is their only marriage. In reality a valid marriage remains until one of the person dies, and that second “marriage” isn’t actually a marriage. If a marriage can’t be valid if one has divorced from the first one, how can polygamy be justified?
R
Rin
Guest
No, not happening.
On the other hand, I think Denmark has ruled that the Lutheran state church is bound by law to marry gay couples, since its close bonds to the state also gives the state governing power over it. There has been no mention of any lawsuits against the Catholic Church in Scandinavia, nor any talk about forcing religions (other than, in Denmark’s case, the state religion) to acknowledge or officiate same-sex marriages.
And even if someone tried, the human righs tribunal would shut it down before you could say “Strasbourg”. So this is not happening, and will not happen in the foreseeable future.
(Source: I’m Scandinavian.)
C
clem456
Guest
I know.
Part of having good moral sense is making objective comparisons between different things.
A gay person would rightly want to make a distinction between homosexuality and incest. Perfectly understandable.
To be consistent with this point of view, the distinction between marriage and gay union must also be recognized.
- Status