Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Same Sex Marriages and Sexual Orientation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Roy View Post
    "in the U.S."
    In North America, yes - specifically the US - it's what Carpe was discussing, and to which I was responding.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      In North America, yes - specifically the US - it's what Carpe was discussing, and to which I was responding.
      I think carpe was confusing the spread in the US with the first infection of humans: "It is a fact that AIDS entered the human species via the gay community.".
      Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

      MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
      MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

      seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Roy View Post
        Hmmm. Patient O (not patient 0) was the first case outside IIRC California, not the first case ever.

        AIDS appears to have first infected humans in Africa, and spread through migrant workers and prostitutes. Its dissemination through the gay community in the USA was much later.
        I just did a little expanded reading, and you're right. I had no idea AIDS dated back (possibly) as far as the late 19th century. The simian link makes Africa a pretty obvious place of origin. My reference to patient 0 was the generic reference the CDC uses to identify the originating patient in a viral outbreak, not the specific reference to Patient O that was used to refer to Dugas (apparently the O stood for "Outside California").

        But I utterly reject the suggestion that because a viral outbreak originated in, or primarily affects, one type of person - it calls into question the morality of that type of person. That argument is unsustainable, and is noting more than a variation on "bad things happen to bad people." That was the implication of some of the earlier posts (not from you).
        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Not limited to, but by far the most affected, along with drug users (needles)...

          [ATTACH=CONFIG]27729[/ATTACH]
          This is a pretty well established fact. It is unclear to me, however, what point you're trying to by presenting it.
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Roy View Post
            I think carpe was confusing the spread in the US with the first infection of humans: "It is a fact that AIDS entered the human species via the gay community.".
            Yes - I had a mistaken impression about the history of the AIDS pandemic. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post

              But I utterly reject the suggestion that because a viral outbreak originated in, or primarily affects, one type of person - it calls into question the morality of that type of person. That argument is unsustainable, and is noting more than a variation on "bad things happen to bad people." That was the implication of some of the earlier posts (not from you).
              Well we could agree that if we all followed the moral commands for human sexuality in the New Testament we would not have these problems. And of course those spreading STDs are generally engaging in immoral behavior.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • Originally posted by seer View Post
                Well we could agree that if we all followed the moral commands for human sexuality in the New Testament we would not have these problems. And of course those spreading STDs are generally engaging in immoral behavior.
                No - we cannot all agree on that. We have no idea what the world would look like if everyone followed the laws on human sexuality that are listed in the bible. That is pure speculation. As for "engaging in immoral sexual behavior, I think you left out the "to me" part, or "according to my interpretation of the bible," part.

                Your moral code and my moral code concerning human sexuality are not aligned.
                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                Comment


                • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                  No - we cannot all agree on that. We have no idea what the world would look like if everyone followed the laws on human sexuality that are listed in the bible. That is pure speculation. As for "engaging in immoral sexual behavior, I think you left out the "to me" part, or "according to my interpretation of the bible," part.
                  Really? If we all just kept our amorous attentions just focused on our one life time spouse, we would not have these problems, period.

                  Your moral code and my moral code concerning human sexuality are not aligned.
                  Of course you approve of homosexuality, promiscuity, prostitution, sex with animals, etc...
                  Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                    I didn't mean case in a strictly legal sense, only in the sense of an example - which I most certainly have linked to.
                    so you have claimed in the past but I have not seen any such link.

                    But again, you just ignored the rest of my post. What's up with that? I thought you weren't dodging?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                      No - we cannot all agree on that. We have no idea what the world would look like if everyone followed the laws on human sexuality that are listed in the bible. That is pure speculation. As for "engaging in immoral sexual behavior, I think you left out the "to me" part, or "according to my interpretation of the bible," part.

                      Your moral code and my moral code concerning human sexuality are not aligned.
                      How would sexually transmitted diseases spread in a world where nobody cheated on their spouse, did not have sex outside of marriage, only heterosexuals marry, and nobody did IV drugs?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by seer View Post
                        Really? If we all just kept our amorous attentions just focused on our one life time spouse, we would not have these problems, period.
                        There is no way to know that is true. It is reasonable to think the impact would be reduced, perhaps even significantly reduced, but there is no way to make that case definitively. And even if it were true, you cannot validly jump from, "this disease is a problem" to "the behavior spreading this disease is immoral."

                        Originally posted by seer View Post
                        Of course you approve of homosexuality, promiscuity, prostitution, sex with animals, etc...
                        I actually have never said that. What I have said is that sex is morally neutral - and gains its morality from context. I don't "approve" of bestiality. I find the idea revolting - I think there are significant risks for disease and harm - and I think it's stupid. I just don't think it rises to the level of "immoral." Homosexuality is no different (to me) than heterosexuality and should be judged by the same rules. To do otherwise is to introduce an immorality (prejudice, bigotry, discrimination, etc.). Prostitution is merely sex for money. I don't approve of it - think it's dangerous - think it's rife with potential medical issues - but again dos not rise to the level of "immoral" (unless someone is being forced into it). Promiscuity is a vague word. If by that you mean any sex outside the bounds of a marriage, I am not that puritanical. If by it you mean a different partner every night? I do not approve of that either. Again - it is because I find the practice foolish on multiple levels. It does not rise to the level of "immoral."
                        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                          There is no way to know that is true. It is reasonable to think the impact would be reduced, perhaps even significantly reduced, but there is no way to make that case definitively. And even if it were true, you cannot validly jump from, "this disease is a problem" to "the behavior spreading this disease is immoral."
                          What is the purpose of morality?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            How would sexually transmitted diseases spread in a world where nobody cheated on their spouse, did not have sex outside of marriage, only heterosexuals marry, and nobody did IV drugs?
                            Many "sexually transmitted diseases" are not ONLY transferred sexually. Many are transferred by an exchange of bodily fluids. We do that in many scenarios - blood transfusions, etc. But more importantly, I am reminded of the line "nature finds a way." A virus is a life-form. It is subject to mutation. So long as there is an accessible vector, there is no significant pressure to mutate and evolve. Remove the vector, and you create the pressure to mutate and evolve. We have no way of knowing how these disease would mutate in that context. Could they become airborne? Could they evolve to permit transfer through touch?

                            What-if's are seldom useful. So IF everyone behaved as you described, and IF the blood supply stayed clan, and IF STD could not or did not mutate, then you statement is probably correct (little STD activity). But that kind of speculation is largely, to me, pointless. And it doesn't say anything about what is and is not moral action. An action s not rendered immoral because it is a vector for transmission of disease.
                            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              What is the purpose of morality?
                              I have responded to this multiple times. Generically, it is to differentiate between "ought" actions and "ought not" actions. However, we do not use the term "moral" for ANY ought/ought-not decisions. The term is reserved for those things we most closely value. "I ought to pick up some milk on the way home" is not a moral statement. "I ought not drive my Jeep until the new paint dries" is not a moral statement. "I ought tell the truth" is a moral statement. "I ought not kill other humans indiscriminately is a moral statement.

                              At least they are for most of us...
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                                I actually have never said that. What I have said is that sex is morally neutral - and gains its morality from context. I don't "approve" of bestiality. I find the idea revolting - I think there are significant risks for disease and harm - and I think it's stupid. I just don't think it rises to the level of "immoral." Homosexuality is no different (to me) than heterosexuality and should be judged by the same rules. To do otherwise is to introduce an immorality (prejudice, bigotry, discrimination, etc.). Prostitution is merely sex for money. I don't approve of it - think it's dangerous - think it's rife with potential medical issues - but again dos not rise to the level of "immoral" (unless someone is being forced into it). Promiscuity is a vague word. If by that you mean any sex outside the bounds of a marriage, I am not that puritanical. If by it you mean a different partner every night? I do not approve of that either. Again - it is because I find the practice foolish on multiple levels. It does not rise to the level of "immoral."
                                So sex with animals is not immoral, neither would sex between brothers, sisters, father and son, mother and daughter, etc...
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                234 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                190 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                313 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X