Originally posted by @philokaliaI think morality is about nothing whatsoever except how we interact and how our behaviour affects others.
Morality is not measured solely by whether or not it harms someone directly, because in that way, it is impossible to actually really come to significant conclusions beyond the most obvious ones. It does not include other scenarios very well.
Originally posted by @philokaliaAre they consenting adults?
Sure, on the one hand, a 48 year old man who thinks he is a 12 year old girl and roleplays as one, watches children shows, and has bizarre relations with two other adult men he refers to as 'daddy' is just a trio of people doiong what they want and harming no one else.
1 edit
Originally posted by @philokaliaWho's talking about "hang-ups"? I haven't claimed that moral sensibilities are caused by "hang-ups".
... this isn't just "hang ups."
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @fmfAnd you haven't really given Philo anything on bestiality being immoral in and of itself.
I have talked about ways in which immoral things can and are done by homosexuals and I think we can agree on those things. But you haven't really given me anything on homosexuality being inmoral in and of itself.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerBecause India has made homosexuality legal [thread topic] not bestiality or paedophilia. I support the legalization of homosexuality but not bestiality and paedophilia. He's clearly interested in having discussions about these things with people he disagrees with, so if he doesnt already know why supporters of the legalization of homosexuality do not support bestiality and paedophilia then he'd either be a complete dummy or a liar.
Why don't you tell Philo why you believe it's wrong?
Originally posted by @dj2beckerStart a thread about bestiality and see if people want to discuss it with you.
And you haven't really given Philo anything on bestiality being immoral in and of itself.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
1 edit
Originally posted by @fmfWell I'm sure if there was some form of logical consistency in your arguments you would have no problem stating why bestiality is wrong. The reason you avoid this is quite obvious.
Because India has made homosexuality legal [thread topic] not bestiality or paedophilia. I support the legalization of homosexuality but not bestiality and paedophilia. He's clearly interested in having discussions about these things with people he disagrees with, so if he doesnt already know why supporters of the legalization of homosexuality do not support bestiality and paedophilia then he'd either be a complete dummy or a liar.
1 edit
Originally posted by @dj2beckerThe first couple of times we discussed it in depth - and we discussed adultery too, I remember - I was quite interested in discussing it with you. That's why I did. But I'm not interested in discussing it with you anymore. My reasons for believing paedophilia and bestiality have not changed at all since those discussions. You'll have to make do with that.
Well I'm sure if there was some form of logical consistency in your arguments you would have no problem stating why bestiality is wrong.
Originally posted by @fmfHow do you not understand what I initially said?
Are they consenting adults?
This isn't a question of the standards of legality, or whether or not we should have Police running around enforcing standards on this. This was the WHOLE first point that I made.
If they are consenting adults, they ca be doing something immoral nonetheless! Something that is undesirable to be a social norm, nonetheless!
Like, four dudes who get super drunk together four nights a week have every legal right to do so, and they really may not be hurting anyone else in the process, but this is not well structured and ordered living.
I just fail to see how you do not understand the efforts to have morality discussed in terms of not some like... mangerial "legality" questions.
Of course, the thread is about a law that passed in India; and so that is a legal discussion. But you are asking me why it is immoral form a secular perspective, right?
I am telling you why.
And the grounds for which it is immoral on a secular level also bring us an idea about how we should structure our society.
Even if something should not be explicitly illegal (getting drunk 4-5 nights a week), it makes sense that we collectively view such actions as immoral and undesirable.
Originally posted by @philokaliaOf course I do. Do you not understand why I disagree?
How do you not understand what I initially said?
Originally posted by @philokaliaI don't much care what you think is or is not "well structured and ordered living". If those four men are not impacting people around them negatively - which I would imagine is unlikely - then I don't see their way of spending their leisure time is immoral - or, indeed any of your business or mine.
Like, four dudes who get super drunk together four nights a week have [i]every legal right to do so, and they really may not be hurting anyone else in the process, but this is not well structured and ordered living.