Go back
McCain is against free choice

McCain is against free choice

Debates

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
And murderers? Are they born that way? Or do they choose to kill? If they were born that way, then it is "natural" so it should be allowed? They don't have a choice. Nature made them murderers.
What you fail to understand is that what is natural is arbitrary and therefore irrelevant for morality. Even if you can think of some consistent way of defining natural behaviour that does not include all behaviour (which no one in this topic has done), it's still useless for defining moral behaviour.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
What you fail to understand is that what is natural is arbitrary and therefore irrelevant for morality. Even if you can think of some consistent way of defining natural behaviour that does not include all behaviour (which no one in this topic has done), it's still useless for defining moral behaviour.
OK, so if I understand all of you, providing consent, you, your mother, father, brother and sister can all ingage in a wild orgy, and you would be OK with it.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
OK, so if I understand all of you, providing consent, you, your mother, father, brother and sister can all ingage in a wild orgy, and you would be OK with it.
I wouldn't be okay with it because I wouldn't consent to it.

But, let's say the four are adults and consent to it. Can you articulate a reason why it's wrong?

I know I can, but can you? 'Because it's gross' is an opinion, not a reason, by the way.

Nemesio

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nemesio
I wouldn't be okay with it because I wouldn't consent to it.

But, let's say the four are adults and consent to it. Can you articulate a reason why it's wrong?

I know I can, but can you? 'Because it's gross' is an opinion, not a reason, by the way.

Nemesio
Mom & dad in their 50's, son & daughter in their 20's, all adults, all consent to sex with each other. It should be allowed & legal, correct?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
Mom & dad in their 50's, son & daughter in their 20's, all adults, all consent to sex with each other. It should be allowed & legal, correct?
If all are sane, I don't see any moral issues, however I don't think it should be legal because that would make legally proving abusive parent-childrelationships much harder, and most of these relationships are abusive anyway.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
If all are sane, I don't see any moral issues, however I don't think it should be legal because that would make legally proving abusive parent-childrelationships much harder, and most of these relationships are abusive anyway.
So you would deny them their right to enjoy each other sex because it MIGHT make it harder in some other case? Does not sound very fair for these consenting adults.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
So you would deny them their right to enjoy each other sex because it MIGHT make it harder in some other case? Does not sound very fair for these consenting adults.
Yes, I would. This is common in law. For example, planning a terrorist attack is illegal in most countries even though you could theoretically make a terrorist plot without actually having any intention to harm people.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Yes, I would. This is common in law. For example, planning a terrorist attack is illegal in most countries even though you could theoretically make a terrorist plot without actually having any intention to harm people.
So it is not much of a stretch that if you are willing to have sex with another man, then that homosexual would not have any difficulty having sex with a boy. As a parent, with a child. Even though they have no intention to harm anyone, but only to show their "love".

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
So it is not much of a stretch that if you are willing to have sex with another man, then that homosexual would not have any difficulty having sex with a boy. As a parent, with a child. Even though they have no intention to harm anyone, but only to show their "love".
The difference is that a) age is easy to verify and b) homosexual sex is usually not abusive while incest is.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
So it is not much of a stretch that if you are willing to have sex with another man, then that homosexual would not have any difficulty having sex with a boy. As a parent, with a child. Even though they have no intention to harm anyone, but only to show their "love".
There is no logic to what you say. That is the same as saying that if you would have sex with a woman then you would be willing to have sex with a little girl.

This is asinine. You are really reaching now.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by CliffLandin
There is no logic to what you say. That is the same as saying that if you would have sex with a woman then you would be willing to have sex with a little girl.

This is asinine. You are really reaching now.
So, define natural.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dace Ace
So, define natural.
Anything that happens in nature.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Anything that happens in nature.
Define nature.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by darvlay
Define nature.
Everything that exists.

Incest, bestiality, sexual predation and so forth are clearly natural acts. The whole argument from nature is deeply flawed: it is natural to want to hack people into little bits.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Everything that exists.

Incest, bestiality, sexual predation and so forth are clearly natural acts. The whole argument from nature is deeply flawed: it is natural to want to hack people into little bits.
Define exists.

Do my thoughts exist?

😉