Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Immorality of Homosexuality
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 1 of 218 (395737)
04-17-2007 5:36 PM


Why is homosexuality immoral?
I understand that "the Bible says so". The Bible also says don't cut your beard.
One can easily make an argument for why murder or theft or rape are immoral without having to rely on a "Bible says so" type statement.
What would be the non-literalist argument for why homosexuality is immoral?

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-17-2007 7:23 PM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 4 by Phat, posted 04-17-2007 7:40 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 7 by Larni, posted 04-18-2007 3:28 AM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 10 by Stile, posted 04-18-2007 9:44 AM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 11 by Tusko, posted 04-18-2007 11:45 AM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 13 by Doddy, posted 04-18-2007 7:03 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 14 by Fosdick, posted 04-18-2007 7:33 PM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 20 by Trae, posted 04-19-2007 3:50 AM Nuggin has replied
 Message 55 by LudoRephaim, posted 07-18-2007 1:09 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 91 by ikabod, posted 07-26-2007 6:43 AM Nuggin has replied
 Message 121 by Ihategod, posted 09-24-2007 12:27 PM Nuggin has replied

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 2 of 218 (395738)
04-17-2007 5:38 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 3 of 218 (395749)
04-17-2007 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
04-17-2007 5:36 PM


*sigh*
you know it's just gonna go into the natural vs unnatural debate which leads us to the animals vs better than animals debate which leads us back to "the bible says so".
good luck. that's all i'm gonna say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 4 of 218 (395754)
04-17-2007 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
04-17-2007 5:36 PM


Opinions: Everybody has one and they all stink.
Possible reasons: (Which also apply to casual heterosexual activity)
  • Creatures seeking perfection in other creatures, which is a form of creature worship rather than consummate oneness.
  • Humans are expected to strive for better and more noble things in life than the perfect orgasm.
    I can't think of any more reasons without citing religious dogma. I digress for now and can only say that Homosexual behavior could be done better. (A Higher and more noble purpose)
    If sex is not being used for procreation, what difference is it from mutual masturbation?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 5 by kuresu, posted 04-17-2007 7:48 PM Phat has not replied
     Message 6 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 8:13 PM Phat has not replied
     Message 8 by PaulK, posted 04-18-2007 3:35 AM Phat has not replied
     Message 9 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-18-2007 6:38 AM Phat has not replied
     Message 30 by b_sharp, posted 05-01-2007 3:35 PM Phat has not replied
     Message 161 by StElsewhere, posted 11-14-2007 5:48 AM Phat has replied

    kuresu
    Member (Idle past 2513 days)
    Posts: 2544
    From: boulder, colorado
    Joined: 03-24-2006


    Message 5 of 218 (395755)
    04-17-2007 7:48 PM
    Reply to: Message 4 by Phat
    04-17-2007 7:40 PM


    Re: Opinions: Everybody has one and they all stink.
    what difference is it from mutual masturbation?
    you say that like it's a bad thing. but I digress. sex for humans is a powerful bonding tool. it's not just for procreation, and imo shouldn't be argued for such. hm. that's still a digression.
    {/uselessABE}:
    funny. my posts number thanks to this one here is at "1666". looks like i'm related to the devil. maybe he was causing my off-topicness? darn little imaginary trickster. {/useless ABE}
    Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 4 by Phat, posted 04-17-2007 7:40 PM Phat has not replied

    Nuggin
    Member (Idle past 2492 days)
    Posts: 2965
    From: Los Angeles, CA USA
    Joined: 08-09-2005


    Message 6 of 218 (395762)
    04-17-2007 8:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 4 by Phat
    04-17-2007 7:40 PM


    Re: Opinions: Everybody has one and they all stink.
    I'm not sure I understand the basis for your morality.
    In the examples I sited above (murder, theft, rape) the acts are immoral because one is doing something to another which is unwanted.
    I'm not sure I understand how
    Creatures seeking perfection in other creatures, which is a form of creature worship rather than consummate oneness.
    is immoral.
    Also, I don't get this
    Humans are expected to strive for better and more noble things in life than the perfect orgasm.
    "expected to" by who?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 4 by Phat, posted 04-17-2007 7:40 PM Phat has not replied

    Larni
    Member (Idle past 164 days)
    Posts: 4000
    From: Liverpool
    Joined: 09-16-2005


    Message 7 of 218 (395843)
    04-18-2007 3:28 AM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    04-17-2007 5:36 PM


    It's not immoral at all.
    But it can trigger a sense of revulsion in some people.
    I would say some people register this feeling and seek to justify it in their heads in any which way they can.
    Another example of people not thinking with their brains.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has not replied

    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 17822
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 8 of 218 (395845)
    04-18-2007 3:35 AM
    Reply to: Message 4 by Phat
    04-17-2007 7:40 PM


    Re: Opinions: Everybody has one and they all stink.
    If you are going to argue that all non-procreative sex is morally wrong then you have to include heterosexual sex where one or both partners are infertile. You're going to have to reject all contraception as morally wrong (even including the "natural" methods that even the Catholics are prepared to accept).
    Are you prepared to go that far ?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 4 by Phat, posted 04-17-2007 7:40 PM Phat has not replied

    Archer Opteryx
    Member (Idle past 3598 days)
    Posts: 1811
    From: East Asia
    Joined: 08-16-2006


    Message 9 of 218 (395861)
    04-18-2007 6:38 AM
    Reply to: Message 4 by Phat
    04-17-2007 7:40 PM


    Re: Opinions: Everybody has one and they all stink.
    Phat suggests as disapproving arguments:
    Creatures seeking perfection in other creatures, which is a form of creature worship rather than consummate oneness.
    False dichotomy. If one tries to make a case from this Platonist perspective, one is stuck with the fact that Platonists and Neoplatonists have always viewed the admiration of perfection in the creature as part of the path toward union with the creator.
    Humans are expected to strive for better and more noble things in life than the perfect orgasm.
    Another false dichotomy. One can strive for better and more noble things in life AND the perfect orgasm.
    Homosexual behavior could be done better. (A Higher and more noble purpose)
    So should people be trying to perfect the orgasm or not?
    Regardless, Plato got to those higher, nobler purposes a long time ago.
    If sex is not being used for procreation, what difference is it from mutual masturbation?
    Maybe none. So what's wrong with mutual masturbation?
    I mean, when two people love each other very much...
    ___

    Archer
    All species are transitional.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 4 by Phat, posted 04-17-2007 7:40 PM Phat has not replied

    Stile
    Member
    Posts: 4295
    From: Ontario, Canada
    Joined: 12-02-2004


    Message 10 of 218 (395883)
    04-18-2007 9:44 AM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    04-17-2007 5:36 PM


    Homosexuality: the Trendy Discrimination
    Nuggin writes:
    Why is homosexuality immoral?
    It isn't. At all.
    What would be the non-literalist argument for why homosexuality is immoral?
    There isn't one. Which is exactly why it isn't immoral.
    All people are equal. All people have an equal right to their pursuit of happiness which does not infringe on anyone else's pursuit of happiness.
    Homosexuals are people. Homosexuals have an equal right to their pursuit of happiness which does not infringe on anyone else's pursuit of happiness. Homosexuality does not infringe on anyone else's pursuit of happiness.
    Anyone who attempts to prevent or restrict homosexual behaviour (including being labelled as "married") is acting immorally by infringing on other people's pursuit of happiness.
    Anyone who discriminates against homosexuals is just as bad as any discriminating slave owner of the past (or present, in some places I suppose...)
    For anyone who thinks they should be able to tell other people how to live:
    What makes you think you have the enlightenment to obstruct another human being's pursuit of happiness that has absolutely no bearing on anyone else?
    Sorry for the preaching. Prejudice and discrimination irks me.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has not replied

    Tusko
    Member (Idle past 101 days)
    Posts: 615
    From: London, UK
    Joined: 10-01-2004


    Message 11 of 218 (395909)
    04-18-2007 11:45 AM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    04-17-2007 5:36 PM


    I think you'd be hard pressed to make a non-scriptural moral argument against homosexuality. You could go the unnatural route, but that ends up looking a bit silly in my mind when you also have to consider men who choose to have sex with wombless women as evil too.
    My favourite argument against homosexuality isn't moral but pragmatic. I first encountered it on a nice little Ku Klux Klan website a few years back. Its actually a standard claim, I learned subsequently, that is lifted and copied and pasted around the internet. I'm not sure where it started. It is (and I paraphrase because I don't want to visit it at work):
    Semen contains Dangerous Things.
    They give solemn stats, saying mouthfuls of semen contain enough viruses as can be found in pints of blood. Well, something like that, anyway.
    It still makes me smile to think that this might be pursuasive to anyone.
    But its still my favourite one.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-18-2007 2:54 PM Tusko has not replied

    macaroniandcheese 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
    Posts: 4258
    Joined: 05-24-2004


    Message 12 of 218 (395953)
    04-18-2007 2:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 11 by Tusko
    04-18-2007 11:45 AM


    Semen contains Dangerous Things.
    yep. it contains these horrible things that make nasty little parasites. no one should ever come into contact with semen.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by Tusko, posted 04-18-2007 11:45 AM Tusko has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 17 by Fosdick, posted 04-18-2007 7:45 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

    Doddy
    Member (Idle past 5909 days)
    Posts: 563
    From: Brisbane, Australia
    Joined: 01-04-2007


    Message 13 of 218 (396052)
    04-18-2007 7:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    04-17-2007 5:36 PM


    Homosexuality vs Drugs
    I’d like to compare the reasons given for the illegality and/or immorality of drugs with homosexuality.
    Health - Drugs aren’t good for you. But really, with the STDs around, neither is sex, or even kissing for that matter. If it wasn’t for drugs feeling good, nobody would take the risk. The same applies for sex, only both the rewards and the risks are less intense.
    Cost to society - Drugs make you do immoral things, and is to the detriment of society. Homosexuality can lead to crimes, sometimes (just as drug users don’t HAVE to commit a crime), such as sexual assault (and, it is often considered that homosexuality leads to pedophilia, but I doubt that is true). Probably no more than heterosexuality, however. I guess the impact on families due to homosexuality would be significant, given the social attitude (regardless of the cause of that attitude) towards it. Although, this particular argument probably argues that prejudice against homosexuality is immoral.
    There would be more of it - If drugs were considered ok, there would be more of them. Likewise, if homosexuality was ok, there would be more of it. But, this is a useless argument for anything, because it assumes the point it is trying to argue, that that thing is bad and more of it is undesirable.
    It's unnatural - interfering with ones consciousness is unnatural. Likewise, interfering with heterosexuality is unnatural. But of course, the premise isn't true, because neither interfering with one's consciousness nor homosexuality are unnatural.
    There, that should give everyone some thinking material. Looks like there is nothing wrong with drugs either!

    Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
    Contributors needed in the following fields: Physical Anthropology, Invertebrate Biology (esp. Lepidopterology), Biochemistry, Population Genetics, Scientific Illustration, Scientific History, Philosophy of Science, Logic and others. Researchers also wanted to source creationist literature references. Register here!

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by nator, posted 04-18-2007 7:34 PM Doddy has not replied
     Message 19 by Nuggin, posted 04-18-2007 8:13 PM Doddy has not replied
     Message 32 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 05-01-2007 11:01 PM Doddy has not replied

    Fosdick 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
    Posts: 1793
    From: Upper Slobovia
    Joined: 12-11-2006


    Message 14 of 218 (396058)
    04-18-2007 7:33 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    04-17-2007 5:36 PM


    Nuggin asks:
    Why is homosexuality immoral?
    Only the moralists can answer that. I don't care about Christian "immorality," or Muslim "immorality,"but I do care about the highest common good. For me, it comes down to choice vs. nature. Most homosexuals claim to be naturally gay, as opposed to deliberately choosing it as a lifestyle. So, if being gay (or whatever) is not a matter of choice, how can it be judged as immoral?
    ”HM

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 5:36 PM Nuggin has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by nator, posted 04-18-2007 7:37 PM Fosdick has replied

    nator
    Member (Idle past 2170 days)
    Posts: 12961
    From: Ann Arbor
    Joined: 12-09-2001


    Message 15 of 218 (396059)
    04-18-2007 7:34 PM
    Reply to: Message 13 by Doddy
    04-18-2007 7:03 PM


    Re: Homosexuality vs Drugs
    quote:
    and, it is often considered that homosexuality leads to pedophilia, but I doubt that is true
    The large majority of pedophiles are straight men.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 13 by Doddy, posted 04-18-2007 7:03 PM Doddy has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 34 by berberry, posted 05-22-2007 9:47 AM nator has not replied
     Message 53 by LudoRephaim, posted 07-18-2007 12:40 PM nator has not replied

    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024