free12thinker

Can anyone provide any moral objections to the following topics, without mentioning "the bible says so":
Gambling
Homosexuality
Casual Sex

[ April 10, 2002: Message edited by: free12thinker ]

[ April 10, 2002: Message edited by: free12thinker ]</p>

ManM

During my freshmen year in college, my roommate participated is casual sex. That led to jealousies, conflicts, and much heartache. And so I feel that the physical pleasure of casual sex is not worth the pain I have seen it cause.

Undercurrent

It is immoral to set up a gambling forum since it most often takes money from the foolish.

It is immoral to gamble at a gambling forum since to do so would encourage someone who has immorally set up a gambling forum to continue to take money from the foolish.

(I think it's a fairly weak argument, but it's secular.)

m.

free12thinker

But if we concentrate on those who are hurt, we would also have to say that just about everything is wrong. Alcohol can breed alcoholics and love in and of itself can lead to all of those things you just mentioned (conflicts, heartache, jelousies). Is love bad? We can't concentrate on the possible bad, or nothing would be right.

luvluv

Love does not necessarily lead to jealousy and all the rest. But it's nearly impossible to consistently engage in casual sex and have it not eventually turn up adverse consequences.

Trust me, it's been attempted.

HumanisTim

[QUOTE]Originally posted by free12thinker:
[QB]Can anyone provide any moral objections to the following topics, without mentioning "the bible says so":
Gambling
Homosexuality
Casual Sex


My only personal moral objection to any of those well mainly the first and the third one. Would be not being responsible. I wouldn't call it immoral though. I don't think gambling is responsible if you're doing it but you don't have the money to be wasteing. Casual sex is irresponsible imo if its done with out a concern for safety. I have no problem with premarital sex me and my fiancee have lots of it. Personally I prefer in the confines of a relationship because it makes it a more personal thing.

[ April 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tim Sweitzer ]</p>

free12thinker

My point exactly (at least about the love thing) Love does not "always" lead to jealousy, and neither does casual sex. People should be able to perform sex with multiple partners in multiple rooms of a farmhouse if everyone consents to it. We cannot call something immoral simply because it "may" hurt someone's feelings, or "may" lead to diseases. And if it does turn up adverse consequences, guess who's fault that is. Thats right, the people who engage in it. Let them worry about that. We let people bungee jump, even though it's dangerous. We let people do a lot of "potentially" dangerous things, because people are going to be responsible for whatever consequences arise from those things. Why is casual sex any different?

luvluv

Because in the history of human relationships casual sex nearly always turns out bad. It has a better than even chance, somewhere down the line, of causing somebody some form of harm, whether it be unwanted pregnancy, diseases, heartache, jealousy, unrequited affection, etc.

I guess it would be considered immoral because the literal odds of you engaging in casual sex and never hurting anyone are almost nil.

Mageth

One could make the same argument about marriage; it often, if not always, causes someone some form of harm. Since the odds of you engaging in marriage and never hurting anyone are almost nil, should marriage be considered immoral?

The AntiChris

Not in my experience.

Chris