Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I understand where you are coming from, but establishing laws should be at the benefit of society without any detriment. You use rape as an example, but rape has a huge human cost and involves engaging in activities without the consent of the affected party. How does SSM impact you in any way?
Ok but you will always have several problems, one being the dissidents who know your laws are merely based on lies and that because life has no meaning and that we have no value then why should they abide by these moral laws they know to be made up when the few percent govern over them. Seems like a good way to control the masses don't you think? Another problem is your rejecting reality by trying to construct social and moral laws that go against what nature intended and in doing so attempting to fight against nature without knowing the consequences.
If one is a naturalist then if would be logical to be consistent with it because for one to be taken seriously they must take their own world view seriously and not attempt to create a moral code that is quite similar to what theists have as then you could argue that they aren't true naturalists and simply can't let go of theist moral codes that are influencing them. You could say the reason why they can't let go is because it bothers their conscience too much which leads them on a road to theism as then one asks does objective moral principles truly exist and if they don't why do I feel live in my life that they they do and can't escape the reality of it.
I would say it would be more logical if naturalism is true to construct laws that are consistent with it. The likes of equality would be abolished, the reality is under naturalism some humans are weak and some are strong, we should not interfere and perhaps permit the extermination of the weak for the strong, doing this would compliment the process of evolution and we wouldn't have a society with large populations reliant on full time care to survive without any quality of life, they are a hinderance on society, why allow and keep these people alive, does it not harm society? This is of course a cold way of thinking but remember you can't think within a frame of mind where you assume moral truths exist such as equality and human dignity because they don't, you simply must use reason in consistency with naturalism. Homosexuality, incest, animalism and any other sexual orientations that lead one to act against what nature intended would simply be seen as disorders.
As for me, I'm catholic, Ssm marriage goes against the very aspect of what marriage was created for and I don't believe we can normalize it as it goes against the truth of moral and natural law. If we normalize it we teach that to future generations that objective moral values don't matter or they don't exist, they would deny these objective moral principles which leads down a road to despair. You see morality is engraved in us, it's part of our humanity, rejecting it leads to misery and destruction. The future of humanity depends on coming to better understanding the truth of objective moral values, this progression ultimately leads to union with God of course but it also leads to complete union with one another and we enter into a state of limitless happiness. Humans crave truth, it satisfies us, we are driven towards it and believe and know society prospers most when we keep in course with it
I don't have a world view that I follow dogmatically like religious types do. Nature intended men to put their seed in as many suitable females as possible, marriage is not a natural construct in that it attempts to inhibit that. Morality is nothing more than a human construct, in a constant state of change.
If morality is a human construct you could never say that rape or killing someone for pleasure is truly wrong, would you not agree? Does that make you feel uneasy?
Of course the ten commandments relate to moral law. Natural law relates to what is and moral law relates to what ought to be. I stated I'm catholic in order to make the point obvious. Pop culture atheists are everywhere especially in the media and entertainment industry, they will villigy the notion of religion and claim it irrational while proclaiming that naturalism is more logical yet they don't realise that by destroying the foundations of most values they hold dear they can't with any reason take them seriously so for example a moral code that is binding on everyone. I will of course agree with you there are pop culture theists aswell. I don't have an issue with any of this, the problem comes whenever they start pursuing great change in society which will affect future generations and the change they pursue is irrational according to their own worldview. Its idiodic. It shows they don't care for truth. Most people I know are neither, they live life not asking these questions, they don't care for it either way and fair enough. They choose that way and don't care for these deeper questions, pretty much the truth isn't something they are ultimately interested in, just living life the best they feel they can. It's those who pursue to uproots values in society without a clue in what they are doing. These foundations helped society through the best and worst of times and we progressed throughout the years trying to perfect ourselves according with certain objective moral truths.
The command about no graven images/keeping sabbath etc isn't a universal moral truth about what ought to be - it's just religious doctrine.
I don't see ssm as a threat to marriage - despite the divorce rate, single parents, mixed families and de facto relationships, I don't see traditional marriage/families going anywhere.
Paddy, I believe your Catholic faith, like any other religious belief, stems from the human need for morality and structure. This is a by-product of higher consciousness and self awareness. To think of it the other way around is what my clergyman father would call fundamentalist claptrap. Isn't the Roman Catholic church more forward thinking than that in many respects?
I also believe you are in error if you compare homosexuality with incest, bestiality and other sexual practices which cause harm and happen without informed consent.
Further, as I'm sure you know, the two main Biblical passages that appear to condemn homosexuality (depending on your interpretation) are in the book of Leviticus and in Paul's letter to the Romans. Leviticus is of course old Jewish law written and enacted in a time when hygiene, safety and cleanliness were not as we know them today, and the New Testament epistle was written by a man whose xenophobia is the stuff of legend. A good apostle, but far from a perfect human.
If morality is a human construct you could never say that rape or killing someone for pleasure is truly wrong, would you not agree?
It's only in the last few decades that a husband could be charged for raping his wife. Evidently it was considered a man's right to have sex whenever he felt like it before, and the woman's right to decide whom she has sex with were of little concern. Of course I think murder and rape are wrong, but it's living in a civilised society that informs my opinion, not some universal truth.
The command about no graven images/keeping sabbath etc isn't a universal moral truth about what ought to be - it's just religious doctrine.
I don't see ssm as a threat to marriage - despite the divorce rate, single parents, mixed families and de facto relationships, I don't see traditional marriage/families going anywhere.
No graven images is a great moral wrong because it harms man relationship with God because it leads man to reject him and therefore reject the truth which in turn leads humanity down a road to despair. If man worships others then he has rejected the truth. Keeping the Sabbath is important and it is a day where we specifically set aside to witness and serve God and therefore because it is inscribed by nature through creation In which God rested on the seventh day so too are we to rest, give glory and thanks.
As for Ssm I believe I answerd that to another poster
It's only in the last few decades that a husband could be charged for raping his wife. Evidently it was considered a man's right to have sex whenever he felt like it before, and the woman's right to decide whom she has sex with were of little concern. Of course I think murder and rape are wrong, but it's living in a civilised society that informs my opinion, not some universal truth.
But the reality is you couldn't argue that him raping her even today is truly wrong. It changed because society under the umbrella of objective moral principles realised that it went against the dignity of both men and women and by stating it to be immoral and illegal we progress in better understanding of these objective moral principles, we become more satisfied the more we progress in it. Also what is a civilised society? Who are you to dictate any moral right or wrong or to claim your society is better than others who disagree with You whenever all of it is relative? Civilised society is one with well organised rules and laws that relate to how we should behave and what our moral code should be. Civilised society is nothing but an illusion under naturalism, morals are relative and therefore don't contain any truth, they are make believe? Ironically the naturalist does what they claim the theist does and that is the belief in fairy tales. If the theist follows a fairytale it must be said that at least they follow their worldview not because they know it to be a fairytale but because they believe it to be truth. The naturalist looks at their world view, sees the truth in it and outright rejects it by creating their own fairytale laws and morals that ironically run contrary to naturalism. Like a mental patient that creates their own reality because true reality is too much to bear.
No graven images is a great moral wrong because it harms man relationship with God because it leads man to reject him and therefore reject the truth which in turn leads humanity down a road to despair. If man worships others then he has rejected the truth.
What IS this 'truth' we keep hearing about? Moreover, isn't it rather odd coming from a Catholic that the worship of graven images is immoral when the Roman Catholic Church is noted for its glorifying of graven images?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy234
Keeping the Sabbath is important and it is a day where we specifically set aside to witness and serve God and therefore because it is inscribed by nature through creation In which God rested on the seventh day so too are we to rest, give glory and thanks.
Um, which 'Sabbath' are we speaking of here ...the biblical 7th-day Sabbath (Saturday) or the bogus 'sabbath' (Sunday) as installed by the authority of the RCC and diligently followed by most of the mainstream Christian churches?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
