Tom Piper

Two questions.

1. Am I right in thinking that those of you who are not opposed to same-sex sexual activity (nor opposed to same-sex marriage) are not opposed to incestuous sexual relations-- brothers and sisters, mothers and sons, fathers and daughters (restricted to adults, if you like) or to incestuous marriages ?

2. Some of you make it sound as though providing a defence of the immorality of homosexuality would be difficult. But for a subjectivist, isn't the subjective subscription to "Same-sex sexual activity is wrong" all it takes to justify such a moral position?

Tom

99Percent

Is Joe moral?

No, because he is lying when he says he is monogamous to each of his partners.

[ April 30, 2002: Message edited by: 99Percent ]</p>

Mageth

1. Am I right in thinking that those of you who are not opposed to same-sex sexual activity (nor opposed to same-sex marriage) are not opposed to incestuous sexual relations-- brothers and sisters, mothers and sons, fathers and daughters (restricted to adults, if you like) or to incestuous marriages ?

I'm not opposed to same-sex sexual activity. I'm not opposed to any private sexual activity between consenting adults. What business is it of mine (or yours) what two (or more) adults do consentually behind closed doors?

2. Some of you make it sound as though providing a defence of the immorality of homosexuality would be difficult. But for a subjectivist, isn't the subjective subscription to "Same-sex sexual activity is wrong" all it takes to justify such a moral position?

Q: "What is your moral stance on homosexuality?"

A: "Same-sex sexual activity is wrong."

Q: "How do you defend your stance? What do you base this moral stance on?"

A: "Same-sex sexual activity is wrong."

Tom Piper

Mageth,

You say,
What point is this supposed to make? The question 'How do you defend your stance" or the question 'What do you base your stance on?' can be asked of anything that is offered in defence of "Same sex moral activity is wrong".

Beyond that, suppose the response to the question is just "I don't base it on anything. It is one of my basic moral principles".

Tom

The Other Michael

Hello Tom Piper,

It was quite the accepted and encouraged practice (from what I've read) among the Pharonic class in ancient Egypt. And many dynastic royal marraiges in later days have taken place between close relatives.

If the activity is among adults, and people are aware of the possible genetic drawbacks if it is procreative sex, then why should it be a concern to the rest of us?

Hi RRH,

It makes you wonder why people can't figure out that being in a relationship that might get you killed by some nut might lead (at times) to a less than stable relationship.

But then, as we ALL know, EVERY hetero relationship is full of bliss, gamboling lambs and cuddly cute kittens. Well, considering some of the recent photo funnies with kittens, maybe I'll delete the livestock from that description!

Why aren't *they* out there railing about hetero relationships destroying the American family? After all, the vast number of nasty divorces, dysfunctional families, etc seem to be the result of hetero relationships.

cheers,
Michael
who has gay friends, and gosh, they seem just like normal people

Mageth

What point is this supposed to make? The question 'How do you defend your stance" or the question 'What do you base your stance on?' can be asked of anything that is offered in defence of "Same sex moral activity is wrong".

You're not offering anything in defense of "same-sex sexual activity is wrong". You're saying you don't base your moral stance on anything. The question, "WHY do you think it is wrong?" is a valid question, and deserves a better response than "Becuz it is wrong."

Beyond that, suppose the response to the question is just "I don't base it on anything. It is one of my basic moral principles".

So you pull your morals out of thin air? Get them from the back of a cereal box? What?

free12thinker

If one's only answer to a question is "I don't base it on anything. It is one of my basic moral principles", than their moral principles have no grounds beyond blind faith. Principle is a belief or system of beliefs. And someone can argue that they need nothing beyond beliefs, but in doing so, they toss aside any logic or reason, and replace it with faith. It removes any arguments from the other side, and makes for a very convenient yet shallow approach to life and ethics and morals.

Oh yeah, that would be a theists all right.

Tom Piper

Mageth,

Why don't you give an example of a defence for some moral principle you actually hold? That way I will get a better idea of what you have in mind.

Tom

free12thinker

The incest thing is difficult for only one reason.

1.) The potential of deformed children if the incest results in a pregnancy. The statistics are simply too high and therefore make the act immoral, if it's unprotected.

Aside from that however, 10,000 "gross" remarks don't make it wrong. I am so tired of people saying that incest, homosexuality or casual sex is wrong because it is unnatural or gross. Fact is, if two people, like you Piper and your long lost sister had sex, it wouldn't be gross if you didn't know it was your sister. But the second you find out she is, you probably force yourself to throw-up just thinking about it. Meanwhile, you are playing the "acceptance" game (what would other think, oh no) so much that you've completely convinced yourself that the evening of fun was really a torturous sin that you'll never forgive yourself for. People thinks it's nasty, but the only reason they can come up with is, "That's my __________ fill in the blank with any family member). Same with homosexuality. "That's another ____ guy/girl).
Any other reasons beyond that? It's sinful. God say's no. The bible says no.

So, as I see it, until someone comes up with something outside of nasty or biblical, than it's really not immoral. Some people just don't tolerate it.

Tom Piper

free12thinker,

My request to you is the same request I made to Mageth. Produce an example of a defence of a moral principle that you actually hold. Give me/us an example of the sort of thing that you have in mind.

Tom