Morally Wrong Behavior vs. What the Civil Government Should Prohibit

[seer]

Quite the reverse. Modern Western society was born of changing social values and the rejection of patriarchal dominance and this changed us into the diverse inclusive society we enjoy in the West today.

That is pure nonsense, patriarchal dominance is still a largely fact in the West. And again, diversity is a meaningless meme. It means nothing.
.

It’s a question of what’s preferable rather than what’s necessary. Totalitarian regimes will survive OK – whether absolute monarchies or fascist dictatorships. But I personally would rather live in the free world, wouldn’t you?

Again, the point is that diversity is meaningless, as a matter of fact it may well undermine social cohesion.

Where did the beliefs of the Christian slave owners the oppressors of women and minority groups differ from NT principles? They justified them with their particular understanding of scripture just as you justify your beliefs. This difference in the interpreting of scripture is why there are so many religious wars in the name of Jesus – each side just knows they are the ones who have got it right. Don’t you.

Stop avoiding my question: where do my beliefs differ from NT principles?

Humans have rarely tolerated rape or preying on the vulnerable as acceptable – except in war, tragically. And the frequency of child-rape in families or by priests and pastors – or anyone in a position of power and authority - has never been accepted as appropriate or normal.

That is just nonsense, wife rape has been accepted in most cultures through most of history. As a matter of fact wife rape was not illegal in your country until the late 70s:http://www.auswhn.org.au/blog/marital-rape/

I know of no accounts of forced sex with juveniles among nonhuman primates. Admittedly bonobos engage in frequent sex in "all possible combinations"—including adults with juveniles—but they do not have sex with unwilling partners.

So you admit that bonobos do practice adult/juvenile sex and forced sex is rampant with other primates:

Male chimpanzees that wage a campaign of sustained aggression against females sire more offspring than their less violent counterparts, new research finds.The results suggest that such nasty behavior from males evolved because it gave the meanest males a reproductive advantage, said study co-author Ian Gilby, a primatologist at Arizona State University in Phoenix.This chimpanzee behavior could also provide some insight into the roots of sexual aggression in men. https://www.livescience.com/48743-ag...duce-more.html
Animal coercive sex

Further information: Sexual coercion, Sexual selection, and Sexual conflict

It has been noted that behavior resembling rape in humans is observed in the animal kingdom, including ducks and geese[citation needed], bottlenose dolphins,[1] and chimpanzees.[2] Indeed, in orangutans, close human relatives, copulations of this nature may account for up to half of all observed matings.[3] Such behaviors, referred to as 'forced copulations', involve an animal being approached and sexually penetrated as it struggles or attempts to escape. These observations of forced sex among animals are not controversial. What is controversial is the interpretation of these observations and the extension of theories based on them to humans. "Thornhill introduces this theory by describing the sexual behavior of scorpionflies. In which the male may gain sex from the female either by presenting a gift of food during courtship or without a nuptial offering, in which case force is necessary to restrain her."[4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociobiological_theories_of_rape#Animal_coercive_s ex

So not only do primates practice sexual aggression against females, it has reproductive advantage. So again, why do you call perfectly natural evolutionary behavior immoral? Why do you hate nature?

You are, not I.

But you just did. Try to label natural behaviors as immoral.

[seer]

But you can attempt to force non-believers to live in a society governed according to your personal religious principles.

Did I say force? We used to have a consensus that things like adultery, fornication, sodomy, etc.. were both illegal and immoral. I have no problem with try to bring that consensus back.

[JimL]

Did I say force? We used to have a consensus that things like adultery, fornication, sodomy, etc.. were both illegal and immoral. I have no problem with try to bring that consensus back.

Right, so you are in favor of a majority forcing their religious beliefs such as homosexuality, gay marriage, etc. on a minority.

[seer]

Right, so you are in favor of a majority forcing their religious beliefs such as homosexuality, gay marriage, etc. on a minority.

James, every law is someone forcing their beliefs on someone else. That is how it works. We, the majority, believe that rape is wrong, so we force our beliefs on the rapist with some form of penalty.

[JimL]

James, every law is someone forcing their beliefs on someone else. That is how it works. We, the majority, believe that rape is wrong, so we force our beliefs on the rapist with some form of penalty.

Rape is illegal because it is forced harm to others not because of it is considered religiously immoral.

[seer]

Rape is illegal because it is forced harm to others not because of it is considered religiously immoral.

Who says? Why is force wrong? Rape is a perfectly natural behavior that we find in other primates and has evolutionary advantage: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post716173

So the bottom line is that you still have one group of people forcing their beliefs on another group of people. Like you would force the Christian baker to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

[Tassman]

James, every law is someone forcing their beliefs on someone else. That is how it works. We, the majority, believe that rape is wrong, so we force our beliefs on the rapist with some form of penalty.

Laws reflect community values and these values change over time. Just as community values reflect the view that rape is wrong, nowadays majority community opinion accepts that homosexuality and gay marriage is OK. It is not for you to attempt the imposition of your minority religious views on the rest of society.

[Tassman]

That is pure nonsense, patriarchal dominance is still a largely fact in the West. And again, diversity is a meaningless meme. It means nothing.

Incorrect. Patriarchal dominance has been in decline since the suffragette movement at the beginning of the 20th century. Diversity, inclusion and equal rights are the foundation of modern society.

Again, the point is that diversity is meaningless, as a matter of fact it may well undermine social cohesion.

No, enforced conformity is more likely to undermine social cohesion than diverse inclusive societies. A resentful population is less likely to cohere than a content one - as Louis XVI found to his cost in France.

Stop avoiding my question: where do my beliefs differ from NT principles?

This depends entirely on what you understand to be “NT principles”. Clearly what YOU understand to be “NT principles” diverges from what Christian slave owners understood to be “NT principles”. Whose got it right – you or them?

That is just nonsense, wife rape has been accepted in most cultures through most of history. As a matter of fact wife rape was not illegal in your country until the late 70s

It was not considered “rape” for a husband to force sex with his wife – she was his property and beholden to him. Fortunately, social values have changed and women have rights today that didn’t apply in the patriarchal era.

So you admit that bonobos do practice adult/juvenile sex and forced sex is rampant with other primates:

I said so regarding bonobo chimpanzees. As for forced sex among other non-human primates they do instinctively what they have to do. Whereas with human primates, due to superior intelligence, we are able to adapt and modify our behavior.

So not only do primates practice sexual aggression against females, it has reproductive advantage. So again, why do you call perfectly natural evolutionary behavior immoral? Why do you hate nature?

So, you are advocating “sexual aggression against females”, because it's natural..

[seer]

Incorrect. Patriarchal dominance has been in decline since the suffragette movement at the beginning of the 20th century. Diversity, inclusion and equal rights are the foundation of modern society.

Sure, it is in decline, but not gone. And it doesn't change the fact that it was a Christian Patriarchal society that had the grace to allow the suffragette movement, which could have been squashed at any time. Try that in Atheist North Korea or China or the former Soviet Block.

No, enforced conformity is more likely to undermine social cohesion than diverse inclusive societies. A resentful population is less likely to cohere than a content one - as Louis XVI found to his cost in France.

So instead of forced conformity you offer no conformity - how is that conducive to social cohesion?

It was not considered “rape” for a husband to force sex with his wife – she was his property and beholden to him. Fortunately, social values have changed and women have rights today that didn’t apply in the patriarchal era.

What do you mean fortunately? Why is no marital rape better than martial rape? It is all relative right?

I said so regarding bonobo chimpanzees. As for forced sex among other non-human primates they do instinctively what they have to do. Whereas with human primates, due to superior intelligence, we are able to adapt and modify our behavior.


So, you are advocating “sexual aggression against females”, because it's natural..

Remember you were justifying homosexual behavior because it was a natural variant of human/animal sexual behavior. That is a meaningless point or defense.

[Tassman]

Sure, it is in decline, but not gone.

Patriarchal dominance is in decline and this will continue in the West; women no longer tolerate being reduced to second-class citizens.

And it doesn't change the fact that it was a Christian Patriarchal society that had the grace to allow the suffragette movement, which could have been squashed at any time.

Not so. The suffragette movement and the attainment of women’s rights was resisted every step of the way in Western patriarchal society. This is why it has taken over a century to achieve social equality with men – and there is still a way to go with issues such as equal pay for equal work.

So instead of forced conformity you offer no conformity - how is that conducive to social cohesion?

Social conditioning and identification with the changing social mores of the day is how social harmony has best been maintained - not via “forced conformity.”

What do you mean fortunately? Why is no marital rape better than martial rape?

Forced, nonconsensual sex is sexual-abuse under ALL circumstances – including within marriage.

Remember you were justifying homosexual behavior because it was a natural variant of human/animal sexual behavior.

No, I was justifying the right of ALL citizens to consummate a consensual sexual relationship regardless of race or sexual orientation.

[JimL]

Who says? Why is force wrong? Rape is a perfectly natural behavior that we find in other primates and has evolutionary advantage: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post716173

So the bottom line is that you still have one group of people forcing their beliefs on another group of people. Like you would force the Christian baker to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

I didn't say that force is wrong, I said that rape was wrong. Why? Because it is against the best interests of, it causes harm to, both the violated individual and society as a whole.

[seer]

Why? Because it is against the best interests of, it causes harm to, both the violated individual and society as a whole.

So what? If one has the power to do so without personal ramifications. Like what the Hutu did to the Tutsi women.

[JimL]

So what? If one has the power to do so without personal ramifications. Like what the Hutu did to the Tutsi women.

It's because of attitudes like that, that we had to create god in the first place. A necessary (psychological) evil I call it.

[Tassman]

Who says? Why is force wrong? Rape is a perfectly natural behavior that we find in other primates and has evolutionary advantage.

Forced sex among non-human primates is not “rape”, it is natural instinctive behavior for the species. But it is NOT acceptable among human primates because what is considered to be socially acceptable behavior has evolved over time.

So the bottom line is that you still have one group of people forcing their beliefs on another group of people. Like you would force the Christian baker to bake a cake for a gay wedding.

False analogy. The Civil Rights Act outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and this applies to self-righteous cake makers - and anyone else demanding special privileges.

[seer]

It's because of attitudes like that, that we had to create god in the first place. A necessary (psychological) evil I call it.

It is not an attitude Jim, it is the way humans are and act - often. It is nature.