Same Sex Marriages and Sexual Orientation

[carpedm9587]

Nonsense Carp, you don't know that the after life doesn't exist. You don't know that our inner most aspiration for continuing life is not a truth, connected intuitively to reality. In any case it still doesn't justify your preaching the cult of death and hopelessness.

You're right. I don't "know" there is no lifer after death. I think the preponderance of the evidence is that there isn't, so my believes strongly leans in that direction.

As for the rest of your post, since I don't "preach the cult of death and hopelessness," I have no response.

[Yttrium]

So why are you here Yttrium? To preach death and hopelessness? What is your motivation?

Why would I preach death and hopelessness? I'm all in favor of eternal life.

[carpedm9587]

Why would I preach death and hopelessness? I'm all in favor of eternal life.

My impression (and I am reading Seer's mind a bit here, so he may want to correct me if I am wrong) is that Seer likes to find "buttons." When I responded to his "cult of death and hopelessness" with an explanation for why atheism is not a cult, and really isn't about death and hopelessness, I think he interpreted that to be an emotional response to his statements (it wasn't). As long as there is any similar response, my experience is that he keeps going back to the perceived "button" over and over again.

Like you, I am not all about death and hopelessness, so I explained it. If Seer wants to keep using the terms...

I'm sure many here agree with him that atheism is all about "death and hopelessness."

[carpedm9587]

You're right. I don't "know" there is no lifer after death. I think the preponderance of the evidence is that there isn't, so my believes strongly leans in that direction.

As for the rest of your post, since I don't "preach the cult of death and hopelessness," I have no response.

Wow - way to dash off a quick post and fail to proof. I'm glad CP is not watching...

[Yttrium]

My impression (and I am reading Seer's mind a bit here, so he may want to correct me if I am wrong) is that Seer likes to find "buttons."

Well, since I don't follow any philosophy of life, the universe and everything, I don't have any buttons to press on the issue. I think we're getting pretty far off topic, though.

So, back to the topic. I think the way society is progressing, that in another twenty year Christians in the U.S. by and large will look back and feel silly about their predecessors' opposition to gay marriage. I also think the current Pope will have some influence on changing the way a great many Christians around the world look at gay rights, since he himself seems to be more and more open to examining the issue.

[seer]

You're right. I don't "know" there is no lifer after death. I think the preponderance of the evidence is that there isn't, so my believes strongly leans in that direction.

Right and your limited, finite understanding is no standard.

As for the rest of your post, since I don't "preach the cult of death and hopelessness," I have no response.

Well what do you offer but death and hopelessness?

[carpedm9587]

Well, since I don't follow any philosophy of life, the universe and everything, I don't have any buttons to press on the issue. I think we're getting pretty far off topic, though.

So, back to the topic. I think the way society is progressing, that in another twenty year Christians in the U.S. by and large will look back and feel silly about their predecessors' opposition to gay marriage. I also think the current Pope will have some influence on changing the way a great many Christians around the world look at gay rights, since he himself seems to be more and more open to examining the issue.

It is possible. In general, positions that have been shown to be discriminatory and prejudicial the various Christian churches have eventually moved away from. This one will be a bit harder, however. The prohibitions in the Christian bible against homosexuality are so explicit, anyone with a fundamentalist "this is the word of god" and "every word is god-breathed and god-inspired" perspective will have a hard time moving away from the position. I suspect a lot of the most conservative Christians never will.

I think the tide-turner will be the next generation, many of whom will look at this and say, "it simply makes no sense" and discard it.

Time will tell.

[carpedm9587]

Right and your limited, finite understanding is no standard.

Well what do you offer but death and hopelessness?

Actually - I offer a great deal of life and a great deal of hope. Just not "eternal" life or "eternal" hope. And you, apparently, have arbitrarily decided that anything that isn't "eternal" is "hopeless" and "life-less."

There is not much that can be said to one who has such a view.

ETA: Seer, I understand your perspective. At least, I think I do. If your beliefs give you hope and comfort, and you honestly believe them to be true, then by all means follow them. Each of us must follow what we find to be true. I am not Christian because I did not find the kind of truth you have apparently found in it. I did find some truths...but not those having to do with gods and salvation and so forth. So I follow what I find to be true. We do not agree on what that is - but it need not make us enemies. At least, not from my side.

[seer]

We do not agree on what that is - but it need not make us enemies. At least, not from my side.

No enemies, some of my oldest friends are hope eaters, I just spent an hour talking to one...

[carpedm9587]

No enemies, some of my oldest friends are hope eaters, I just spent an hour talking to one...

Hope eaters...?

[Tassman]

Right and your limited, finite understanding is no standard.

Your escapist fantasy is no standard, more to the point.

Well what do you offer but death and hopelessness?

If you have to ask what life is for you're asking the wrong question. One finds joy in the people one loves and fulfilment in the pursuit of one's interests. Why would hoping for something better in a mythical future life do anything more than merely fuel discontent with this one?

[seer]

Your escapist fantasy is no standard, more to the point.

Prove that it is a fantasy...

[oxmixmudd]

Your escapist fantasy is no standard, more to the point.



If you have to ask what life is for you're asking the wrong question. One finds joy in the people one loves and fulfilment in the pursuit of one's interests. Why would hoping for something better in a mythical future life do anything more than merely fuel discontent with this one?

It is not simply a hope for something better in the future, but something an order of magnitude better now, AND a hope for something in the future. When Christ says "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but by me", He is not talking about some pie in the sky future thing. He is talking about now, today, this very minute. Christ offers the water of life today to any and all willing to receive it.

Jim

[MaxVel]

Since "moral reasoning" is about sorting "ought" actions from "ought not" actions, the sentence above is simply part of the definition of "morality."



If one wants to live a life of essentially pure skepticism, sure. I also believe it is not possible to know pretty much anything to the level of 100% certainty. Knowledge is essentially about probabilities. There is always a possibility of error. But some things are so close to 100% that, for practical purposes, we accept them as such and move on. The same applies to morality. Why bother categorizing actions as moral/immoral if the purpose is not to act on the "ought" actions and not act on the "ought not" actions. After all, the sorting is driven by our desire to identify actions that protect/enhance things we value and actions that threaten/diminish those things.



I don't see the problem. So perhaps we are using the term "moral relativism" (and subjectivism) differently.



Yes - that can happen.



At the time of that assessment, to that person.



No.



Your complaint, Max, boils down to "but it isn't objective/absolute." We know that. Moral relativism/subjectivism is not moral absolutism/objectivism. This is the perpetual argument put forward, but it's not an argument. As I have said to Seer multiple time - all it does is remind us that moral relativism/subjectivism is not moral absolutism/objectivism. It's a definition - not an argument. I have come to call it "Technique #1"



Actually - coercion (I call it contention) is usually the last thing we turn to when moral disagreement cannot be addressed/resolved another way.



Again - this is Technique #1 again. It looks compelling, but it doesn't actually any anything. We know moral relativism/subjectivism is not absolute/objective. But we also know it is how morality works in humans and human societies, and always has.



No. "Power" does not make for morality. "Might" doesn't make right. It just makes enforcement. It will be exerted by the strong individual/group as a last ditch effort to ensure their moral stance is how their world functions, because it is what their moral framework tells them is "right." People with like moral frameworks will band together to gain that type of power.

The gay issue is a marvelous example of exactly this dynamic. For decades now, those of us advocating for "gay rights" were in the minority. Advocate as we would, those who held that homosexual marriages and intimacy were/are immoral dominated the society, and used their power to ensure our laws reflected that belief. No amount of "convincing" could change that mindset. Over time, however, the arguments in favor of gay rights began to convince many. Today, the larger body of people (in the U.S. anyway) accept homosexual unions and intimacy as "perfectly normal." Now those who oppose that view are in the minority. For many of them, convincing will never work. They are set in their views and those views will not alter. Over time, as those numbers shrink, they will be increasingly isolated in their churches and communities (much like neo-nazis and the KKK are today with respect to racist views). And the laws of the land are shifting and (hopefully) will continue to shift to embrace the LGBTQ community as social and legal equals. That is the might of the majority - but it does not "force" the minority to adopt this as moral. Until they are convinced by the arguments - they will see these laws as wrong, resist them in any way they can, and fight to restore what they believe to be right to the laws of the land.

Might makes laws and enforcement - it doesn't make "right."

I think we're talking at cross-purposes, somewhat. I have been endeavouring to explain why I feel that your moral views, based on your moral worldview, are worthless to me. As part of that effort, I have been also trying to point out that I feel that you are acting in ways inconsistent with your declared moral philosophy. I don't think you do consistently act as if your moral philosophy is true, rather, you use language and make arguments as if you were talking about something that had objective truth.

Your last paragraph above illustrates that. It makes no difference what anyone's moral beliefs are, what controls what actually happens is who has the most power, be it via persuasion, coercion or outright violence. Holding any particular moral belief is of no consequence in terms of approaching an objective truth about reality, thus, there is no value in maintaining that belief in the face of disagreement, rational argument against it, or even intimidation and appeals to consequences. So there is no significant reason for you to maintain whatever your current moral beliefs are - yet you spend plenty of time arguing for them - , nor any reason why you would feel any twinge of conscience when forcing someone to violate their conscience and go against their moral beliefs.

That is perhaps the greatest moral evil I can think of - compelling someone to violate their own conscience, thus making them morally despicable in their own eyes. Yet here you are happily advocating for it.

[Tassman]

It is not simply a hope for something better in the future, but something an order of magnitude better now,

We don’t see it now. The most Christian country in the Western World, i.e. the USA, is the most violent and inequitable by an order of magnitude. The secular nations rank much higher on the Happiness and Human Development Indexes.

AND a hope for something in the future. When Christ says "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but by me", He is not talking about some pie in the sky future thing. He is talking about now, today, this very minute. Christ offers the water of life today to any and all willing to receive it.

You’re welcome to your beliefs. I don’t share them.