Originally posted by @philokaliaHaving homosexual sex with someone using coercion or without informed consent would be immoral to my way of thinking. As for pedophiles, I am not particularly interested in what thoughtcrimes they have because of their "sense of sexuality"; I see morality as governing action, interaction, and behaviour. I see sexual acts against children as immoral as they involve sex that is engaged in without informed consent and, as there is a power imbalance angle between an adult and a child, I'd consider it a form of coercion too. Does your Bible tell you how young a child you can have sex with?.
Would you not say that a pedophile has a perverted sense of sexuality? Would it not be possible that this word applies to all manner of other orientations?
FMF to Pudenik: "Perverse"? You mean you really, really don't like it, right?Pudgenik's word choice is not a "little thing" in the context of this conversation. His feeling that homosexuality is "perverse" is either a religious notion - in which case he should talk to religious people about it - or he uses the word "perverse" because he is not homosexual and finds the idea of having sex with another man deeply unappealing - in which case his use of the word is emotional and is not making a moral argument.
Originally posted by @philokalia
Pudgenik, pay no mind to the way that FMF will focus in on these little things.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @fmfOr he could be using the word “perverse” as a loose synonym for “abnormal.” There’s always that possibility.
Pudgenik's word choice is not a "little thing" in the context of this conversation. His feeling that homosexuality is "perverse" is either a religious notion - in which case he should talk to religious people about it - or he uses the word "perverse" because he is not homosexual and finds the idea of having sex with another man deeply unappealing - in which case his use of the word is emotional and is not making a moral argument.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
15 Sep 18
Originally posted by @romans1009<or he uses the word "perverse" because he is not homosexual and finds the idea of having sex with another man deeply unappealing>
Or he could be using the word “perverse” as a loose synonym for “abnormal.” There’s always that possibility.
Do you find the idea of having sex with another man to be deeply unappealing, Kiddo?
Have you and tiger been experimenting?
15 Sep 18
Originally posted by @secondsonFor homosexuals to feel attraction and love for each other and want to enter into a loving relationship is natural for them. That you find it "abhorrent" does not alter this. For them, mutual attraction is normal and natural in the same way heterosexuals feel attraction and love for each other and want to enter into loving relationships. Most homosexuals I have known have been rationally objective thinking men and women who know the difference between right and wrong.
Homosexuality is an act of defiance against nature, and is morally abhorrent to the mind of a rationally objective thinking man or woman that knows the difference between right and wrong.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @fmfSo individuals and not society or statistics decide what is normal? I’m sure the bloke who wears a pair of underwear as a hat while shopping at the supermarket thinks that’s normal and natural.
For homosexuals to feel attraction and love for each other and want to enter into a loving relationship is natural for them. That you find it "abhorrent" does not alter this. For them, mutual attraction is normal and natural in the same way heterosexuals feel attraction and love for each other and want to enter into loving relationships. Most homosexuals I have ...[text shortened]... een rationally objective thinking men and women who know the difference between right and wrong.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117574
15 Sep 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaThese examples are just red herrings by you.
You really do not understand how any of this works, do you?
If you simply throw out the concept of "Is it immoral to eat pork?", "Is it immoral to kill another person?" or "Is it immoral to steal a car?", the assume circumstance is one in which the central theme of the action is a man, with zero extenuating circumstances and zero context, eats pork or ...[text shortened]... s?" the answer owuld be an obvious YES, but you have not accurately described the circumstances.
You claim that it is not morally acceptable to burn someone alive and yet your version of God does this to billions of people and for eternity.
So there is one morality for you and another moral code for your God, that’s TWO moral codes, rules, whatever you want to call them.
Therefore by definition, there is not one standard morality.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117574
Originally posted by @philokaliaSure, I’ll “walk down the path” with you any time you feel you have a scriptural case to demonstrate that there is less than TWO moral codes.
Do you want to walk down the path again where we talk about the actual content of the Bible?
Walk with me Jacob, the “path” awaits.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117574
15 Sep 18
Originally posted by @philokaliaAre you equating mutually consensual adult sex with predatory child abuse?
Would you not say that a pedophile has a perverted sense of sexuality?
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @divegeesterYou know nothing of the spiritual realm, tiger.
These examples are just red herrings by you.
You claim that it is not morally acceptable to burn someone alive and yet your version of God does this to billions of people and for eternity.
So there is one morality for you and another moral code for your God, that’s TWO moral codes, rules, whatever you want to call them.
Therefore by definition, there is not one standard morality.
Heed these words from Job:
“Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?”
(Job 40:7-8)
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @divegeesterAnd heed these words from Isaiah:
These examples are just red herrings by you.
You claim that it is not morally acceptable to burn someone alive and yet your version of God does this to billions of people and for eternity.
So there is one morality for you and another moral code for your God, that’s TWO moral codes, rules, whatever you want to call them.
Therefore by definition, there is not one standard morality.
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
(Isaiah 55:8-9)
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @divegeester“Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?”
These examples are just red herrings by you.
You claim that it is not morally acceptable to burn someone alive and yet your version of God does this to billions of people and for eternity.
So there is one morality for you and another moral code for your God, that’s TWO moral codes, rules, whatever you want to call them.
Therefore by definition, there is not one standard morality.
(Isaiah 45:9)