Homosexuality and reason - Page 4 - Religion, God, and Theology

I don't know what causes homosexuality but if I had to guess I would say it was epigenetic.

DaveT if we use your reasoning and you admit to supporting public education, we can claim you support hot gradeschool teachers having sex with their students.
You made no arguement. All you did was insult catholics. Insults are the weapons of the weakminded which is where I will pigeon hole you for the moment.

So calling homosexual immoral and anal sodomy isn't insulting?

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:11 PM

#77

Jibninjas

Stuck in a While loop

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 11,612

Quote:

Originally Posted by Original Position

Madnak claimed that there is no rational reason to believe that homosexuality is immoral. You can consistently claim this if you believe that morality is objective. You can consistently claim this if you believe that morality is not objective. I think we agree about this, but I just want to clarify it since you deny it in your final sentence.

Madnak's claim (I think) was not that no rational reason for believing homosexuality is immoral could exist, but that it doesn't exist.

I didn't really deny it in my final sentence, I just got kinda lazy with my wording.

I agree that this was Madnak's claim, but I added in my extra criteria because of the fact that I disagree with him that there is no reason, as I would of course argue that objective morality does exist.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:12 PM

#78

Vael

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 6,377

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

However, Assume it is true that some males are attracted to other males.
Assume those males desires to sodomize the males they are attracted too.
Assume no male desires to be sodomized.

Would sodomy be immoral?

If they voluntarily agree to being sodomized, then I assume the benefit of getting to sodomize someone too outweighs the cost of being sodomized..

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:19 PM

#79

daveT

S.A.G.E. Master

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23,955

Really. Using "sodomy" to describe sex of any form is appealing to emotional bias. And you keep on using it, not only to stir up people to write mean stuff, but to hold your comfirmation bias. Unfortunately, you can end your misuse of "sodomy" if you look up the word in the dictionary. At that point there is no reasonable connection betweem sodomy and sex.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:19 PM

#80

Deorum

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 7,271

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vael

If they voluntarily agree to being sodomized, then I assume the benefit of getting to sodomize someone too outweighs the cost of being sodomized..

Yup. This is the point I keep trying to convey to Stu. Econ 101: nobody voluntarily enters a transaction in which they expect to give up more utility than they get.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:20 PM

#81

Stu Pidasso

banned

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 12,373

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexArcher

Also, I don't understand why theists care at all what gay people do to each other. It's baffling. Why are you even worried about it if it's got nothing to do with you?

If you are not gay, its something beyond your realm of experience. I'm simply not 100% convinced sodomy is a benign act. To me it seems to be an inherintly abusive one.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:20 PM

#82

IcemanDan

journeyman

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 298

This thread has gotten really off track, but I think most of us are in agreement about the original post-- that just because something is "natural" that doesn't mean it is morally ok.

I think we all also agree that stu pidasso is in the wrong that all anal sex is unwanted by the receiver.

I think it's time to move on to something else before this degenerates more into what sex acts he thinks are ok.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:21 PM

#83

Eddi

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,296

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveT

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:22 PM

#84

Stu Pidasso

banned

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 12,373

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveT

So calling homosexual immoral and anal sodomy isn't insulting?

Not in the context of the current discussion. People are being very reasonable for the moment. You're attempting to take it to the gutter and I am calling you out on it.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:23 PM

#85

IcemanDan

journeyman

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 298

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deorum

Yup. This is the point I keep trying to convey to Stu. Econ 101: nobody voluntarily enters a transaction in which they expect to give up more utility than they get.

I agree with you here, but be careful with this argument. It is the basis of all economic theory, but the tendency towards utility maximization is not really proven by anything scientific.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:24 PM

#86

starvingwriter82

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 7,793

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

If you are not gay, its something beyond your realm of experience. I'm simply not 100% convinced sodomy is a benign act. To me it seems to be an inherintly abusive one.

Despite the extensive medical evidence that it's pleasurable for some.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:24 PM

#87

EvilSteve

Midlife Crisis

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 13,195

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveT

From Merriam Webster's online dictionary:

Quote:

Main Entry: sod·omy
Pronunciation: \ˈsä-də-mē\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1–11
Date: 13th century

: anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex; also : copulation with an animal

— sod·om·it·ic \ˌsä-də-ˈmi-tik\ or sod·om·it·i·cal \-ti-kəl\ adjective

Sodomy definitely refers to a sexual act. Didn't know it had anything to do with oral sex, or copulation with an animal, though. Probably would make things clearer to call it "anal sex" rather than sodomy, when referring to that act specifically.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:27 PM

#88

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

If you are not gay, its something beyond your realm of experience.

Not true. You could have your girl use a strap on and conduct an experiment so you'll have more proof to back up your ass equals no pleasure beliefs.

Quote:

I'm simply not 100% convinced sodomy is a benign act. To me it seems to be an inherintly abusive one.

If a women has sex because she wants to but she is frigid and gets no pleasure form sex does that mean all the men she has sex with are abusive?

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:27 PM

#89

TexArcher

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 5,813

Quote:

Originally Posted by EvilSteve

Sodomy definitely refers to a sexual act. Didn't know it had anything to do with oral sex, or copulation with an animal, though.

Oh yes, I vaguely remember a case some years ago in the deep south (Bama or Georgia maybe?) where a teenage couple was arrested for violating the anti-sodomy laws when she was caught blowing him in a parked car.

You can imagine the righteous outrage at the clear misapplication of the law's intent........

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:28 PM

#90

Stu Pidasso

banned

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 12,373

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deorum

Yup. This is the point I keep trying to convey to Stu. Econ 101: nobody voluntarily enters a transaction in which they expect to give up more utility than they get.

Sometimes they get swindled though. Like I said, sodomy seems to me to be an inherently one sided act. Somebody gets stuck(to obvious a pun?). I could be wrong though.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:29 PM

#91

daveT

S.A.G.E. Master

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23,955

But having oral coopulation with the opposite sex is sodomy, ergo, fellacio and cunnilingus is sodomy. Oh well. I learn something new every day. Is kissing sodomy?

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:30 PM

#92

Deorum

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 7,271

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

If you are not gay, its something beyond your realm of experience. I'm simply not 100% convinced sodomy is a benign act. To me it seems to be an inherintly abusive one.

It isn't; how much more evidence do you need than the millions of people who routinely do it consentually and claim to enjoy it? Do you honestly believe they are all lying or confused?

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:31 PM

#93

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveT

Is kissing sodomy?

Only in the deep south.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:32 PM

#94

Stu Pidasso

banned

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 12,373

Quote:

Originally Posted by batair

If a women has sex but she is frigid and gets no pleasure form sex does that mean all the men she has sex with are abusive?

The potential for pleasure is there. Is that the case with sodomy(by sodomy I mean anal sex)? My intuition tells me it is not the case.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:36 PM

#95

madnak

Cooler than Sammy Hagar

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 19,742

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

Go start a thread on some other forum using the best arguments you can make to claim homosexuality is immoral and I bet the "it's natural" retort comes up pretty quickly.

For you Madnak...and anyone else who takes your position....lets use a different "vice". If a kleptomaniac stole something of value, should they be imprisoned or given a pass because for them "it's natural" to steal? Or do we hold them accountable given that they have the ability to reason out that their action is wrong?

Like I said, I'm not fan of the naturalistic fallacy. But in this case, neither. They're both pretty dumb responses if you ask me.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:37 PM

#96

Deorum

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 7,271

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

Sometimes they get swindled though. Like I said, sodomy seems to me to be an inherently one sided act. Somebody gets stuck(to obvious a pun?). I could be wrong though.

Do you really think they are all getting swindled? And they all keep getting swindled? And when they get mad or break up, go out looking for a new swindler?

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:38 PM

#97

Splendour

banned

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 18,896

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

In another thread IcemanDan said:

The bolded emphasis is mine.

Now suppose you accept the premise that humans have the ability to reason out things and therefore have a responsibility to behave morally even when their natural instincts drive them to behave otherwise. Would that preclude the holder of such a postion from claiming that homosexuality is not immoral simply because for some humans(and apparently animals) it's an instictive drive?

Are you asking if human's higher function of reasoning which allows us to entertain moral thoughts means that it negates the instinctual drive argument for homosexuality?

I rephrased that because I'm not following what you are asking in your last sentence. The way you phrased that sentence is too roundabout and I'm not sure what you are asking.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:39 PM

#98

TexArcher

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 5,813

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

The potential for pleasure is there. Is that the case with sodomy(by sodomy I mean anal sex)? My intuition tells me it is not the case.

Well, your intuition disagrees with biology.

The prostate is known as "the male G spot".

You might be so averse to something going up your butt as to not want to explore it (and I feel the same way), but the "potential for pleasure" is certainly there, it's a biological fact.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:41 PM

#99

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Pidasso

The potential for pleasure is there.

Ok she is frigid due to nerve damage and the doctors say she will never feel physical pleasure again. She just has sex with her husband to bring him pleasure. Is he abusive for allowing her to sex him?

What if shes following that point in the other thread you made and she thinks it's her God demand duty to have sex with her husband. Would that mean God is abusing her?

Quote:

Is that the case with sodomy(by sodomy I mean anal sex)? My intuition tells me it is not the case.

Your intuition needs some work.

Quote

02-13-2010 , 04:42 PM

#100

EvilSteve

Midlife Crisis

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 13,195

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deorum

Do you really think they are all getting swindled? And they all keep getting swindled? And when they get mad or break up, go out looking for a new swindler?

That's what makes this swindle particularly vile and reprehensible. Not only have they been swindled into accepting physical abuse, but they've been swindled into believing that they actually enjoy it. These habitual catchers have been swindled so deeply, that they actively seek out new opportunities to be swindled again and again.

Quote

Page 4 of 47

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 24

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 4 of 47

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 24

Last