»Is homosexuality immoral?«
|
|||
 ah yes that thread. well the only thing i found truly credible among your list was the gay priests. and i think i so eloquently explained that away. heh.  posted by sangu |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgReligion and Mysteries, from worship to werewolvesReligious & Philosophical TopicsIs homosexuality immoral? |
|
|||
 sangu: why do you still call yourself a christian? Hmm, might be interesting to start a thread, something like, "How much of Christianity do you have to obey to call yourself a Christian?" posted by Tiefling |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Tiefling: Hmm, might be interesting to start a thread, something like, "How much of Christianity do you have to obey to call yourself a Christian?" It's basically IMO → Is the influence of Christianity decreasing? posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nah, I'm not talking about the influence of Christianity. I'm talking about which laws you have to follow to be a Christian. For example, can homosexuals be called Christians? posted by Tiefling |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Tiefling: Nah, I'm not talking about the influence of Christianity. I'm talking about which laws you have to follow to be a Christian. For example, can homosexuals be called Christians? I still think, that mentioned topic covers it. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some of you, the homophobics, are making me feel sick!Homophobics are almost in the same class of evil as terorrists, serial killers and paedophiles! What in fact is immoral is you(homophobics) and until you are gotten rid of, this world can never be the perfect and harmonious place that gGod or Allah or whatever intended it to be! posted by abandon hope |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Let me tell you this no-one and I mean NO-ONE chooses their sexuality so why punish people for being who they are, who God made them? What's wrong with being different? Aren't Christians,etc supposed to love EVERYONE as themselves and who are we to say that because someone is differet that they are perverted and immoral the fact that anyone on the planet could think such evil, hatefull and IMMORAL things makes me want to move to Mars maybe I could take a member of the same sex as me and have a great life just to spite you all(again only the evil homophobes)! posted by abandon hope |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
What does homosexuality have to do with morals? Two people getting together, be it for love or sex, is amoral. You straight people just pretend that tomorrow you wake up and the world has reversed and being straight is wrong. Every "normal" person is gay. The president and the pope are gay. Can you, as a straight person switch your hetrosexuality into homosexuality just because everyone is telling you that you are immoral? Would you be even willing to discuss it without vomiting? posted by Danilo |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
I couldn't agree more! You hetros(some) just think thet gays should all change to fit in with you and be "normal" but if the tables were to be turned then I doubt you would like to be made to change! posted by abandon hope |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 This has been an interesting thread because it departs from the questioned posed. Much of it dealt with situational ethics rather than the question of morality. For example, the arguments about compassion; what's right for society; what's it hurt for homosexuals to be homosexual; would you have followed Hitler. And, even the intimation that morality can be determined in the absence of a deity. Hillel's rule (Do NOT do unto others that which you would not have them do unto you) was substituted for the Christian golden rule (DO unto others what you would have them do unto you). Hillel lived about 100 years before Jesus. And, in a sense, these two rules exemplify the difference between situational ethics and morality. Hillel's rule is restrictive, proscribing actions, while the golden rule is proactive, encouraging a course of action. Similarly, situational ethics proscribe advocating a belief system - don't criticize, don't pass judgment - while morality encourages a set of actions based upon belief. Not law, not custom but BELIEF. If we look at the definition of moral: --------------------------------------- Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source mor·al –adjective 1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes. 2. expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel. 3. founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations. 4. capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being. 5. conforming to the rules of right conduct (opposed to immoral): a moral man. 6. virtuous in sexual matters; chaste. 7. of, pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support. 8. resting upon convincing grounds of probability; virtual: a moral certainty. –noun 9. the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc. 10. the embodiment or type of something. 11. morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct. ------------------------------------------------------------- the underlying theme is 'right and wrong'. As a moral imperative, 'right and wrong' and 'virtuous' imply an obligation to one's "after-life" as there is no benefit to strive to conform to "3) right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom." The right conduct supercedes the situational ethics prescribed by law and custom, requiring a course of action which may be detrimental to life - for example, opposing the actions of a Hitler. Situational ethics require that we conform to law and custom, which does not imperil our existence. Therefore, morality requires at least a belief in an after-life, if not a deity. Hence, morality must be based in religion - even if the after-life is reincarnation rather than heaven. And, all of the religions consider homosexuality to be immoral, even when situational ethics prohibit us from putting to death two men who lie with each other. The Bible does illustrate that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because the townsmen wanted to have sex with the male angels sent by God, even in preference to the two virgin females offered in lieu of the males. The Bible gives specific instruction to put to death men who lie with each other. If we consider the poignant posting of skater47, "You can't believe how it takes the joy out of a teenager...being homosexual isn't a fun choice anyone would make." there can be no question that homosexuality is contrary to "7) pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character." And, skater47 is not the only one who has expressed that sentiment. My understanding is that the sentiment is common in the gay community. From the definition of moral, morality can only be used to determine one's own conduct, not an obligation to society, regardless of society's benefit from moral conduct. Similarly, by definition, it does not matter whether homosexuality is biological, chemical or psychological in nature. It is an activity contrary to the 'right conduct' which defines morality and morals. From the meaning of the word moral, the only answer, TO THE QUESTION POSED, is that homosexuality is immoral - against the religious concept of right and wrong, and painful in the thoughts of homosexuals. That we have compassion, as posited by the golden rule, and fail to ostracize or castigate homosexuals, consistent with Hillel's rule, is a matter of situational ethics, not morality. posted by ipsism |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Perfect. You just confusingly (if that is even a word) explained why homosexuality is amoral, not immoral. Although you explained quite painfully the concept of compasion entering into our version of morality, I don't see compasion nor ethics as part of the answer to the question. posted by Danilo |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Danilo: I don't see compasion nor ethics as part of the answer to the question. EXACTLY! That's the point that I was making. The question concerned morality. And the answer is, overwhelmingly, that homosexuality does not conform to moral norms. Homosexuality is, therefore, immoral. That has nothing to do with the acceptance or tolerance of homosexuality. Rather, that tolerance is part of our compassion and ethics. This is similar to the Christian concept of 'hate the sin but love the sinner'. And, I disagree strongly with your statement that homosexuality is 'amoral', assuming that you mean it has no moral implications. All major religions have made statements regarding the morality of homosexuality. You cannot say that those moral decisions have no effect just because you disagree with them. Judaism and Christianity have declared homosexuality immoral, even though neither advocates action against homosexuals. Islam is violently homophobic to the point of stoning and decapitation, even today. You can, of course, disagree with or reject the doctrines of any group. That is a personal decision. Morality, however, concerns more than the individual. And, no individual can change moral concepts just because they agree or disagree with those concepts. posted by ipsism |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
What you are saying is that religion sets the moral standards and I am saying that there are moral standards without religion. That is why I believe it is amoral and you believe it is immoral. What religions have said about homosexuality has nothing to do with the morality or immorality or amorality of it. Religion CLAIMS to set moral standards but moral standards are set by individuals and societies knowing the difference between right and wrong. Not to veer off subject but... this is what religion has done to our society. It has made the people think they do not have the ability to know between right and wrong without the religion. We are not talking about whether we believe homosexuality is normal. Societal norms are not moral norms. posted by Danilo |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
"What religions have said about homosexuality has nothing to do with the morality or immorality or amorality of it." This is just wrong. You can believe anything that you want but your belief that 'up is down' or that 'black should be white' does not conform to societal norms and does not make it so. To communicate, you must use the same vocabulary. If you change meanings, there can be no communication. You have given no definition of morality, just claiming that it's what you want it to be. You are welcome to believe that; but, you are using your own definitions and that is the only way that you can claim homosexuality is 'amoral'. Also, you completely ignore what posters who are homosexual have said, that they have guilt over their sexuality. One cannot have feelings of guilt unless they feel that there is something 'wrong'. No, not every homosexual has feelings of guilt but that does not change the fact that many do. If you feel that it necessary to change vocabulary so that you can claim your point is correct, please do so. For me, it's just an intellectual opinion, I have no emotional involvement. posted by ipsism |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
You are the one that posted the meaning of morality from the dictionary. I did not feel I had to give any other meaning to the word. How have I changed the meaning of the word in order to make me correct? There is nothing in the dictionary that states morality comes from what certain religions claim. You can't expect me to change what the dictionary says, nor can you. If it makes you believe you are correct to think religion spells out what is moral, you can believe it but don't expect to have someone that can read and think (sometimes at the same time) tag along. What do you think makes some homosexuals feel guilty about their sexuality? Many factors could but the most prevelent one is religion. The same religion that tells people that they have the key to what is moral and what is not. The same religion that castigates the homosexual and hides the pedeophile preist. Feelings of guilt are horrible and sometimes destroy lives but not always are they justifiable. One can be made to feel guilty about having blue eyes. That would not make blue eyes immoral. I just have opinions. I am not sure about their being 'intellectual' opinions but they are just opinions. No emotional involvement either. I just know right from wrong (high morals)  . posted by Danilo |
|||
|
|||
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 Next
Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 Next
 Register Log in |
The time now is 29 August 2008, 01:45 php B.B. |