Are you equating those two? Is something which offends you deeply also necessarily objectively wrong? You seemed to object to gay sex for example – can you please explain to me why that’s “objectively wrong”?
Am I equating Perspectivism with Moral Relativism??? → definitely-yes, I am.
That would depend on whether I-myself am “objective” or not…
I assume you want the short answer…
Gay sex is wrong, because it is a sexual-deviation away from the traditional/ideal Western family consisting of one man (as the head, the father) and one woman (as the body, the mother). This is also why gays are considered, and actually-are, sexual-deviants. They are deviating away from “God’s purpose” so-to-speak. However, the real reason I am opposed to gay sex is its hedonistic character. I consider hedonism to be a social “evil” that will tear down all things ‘holy’ and ‘sacred’ without a care or second-thought. Besides, who cares if a 31-year-old man has sex with a 17-year-old little, immature, girl. → right? Apparently-to-me, nobody in fact does care, so it’s “okay” as long as you don’t get caught. → right?
And if people are left to themselves, empty, desolate, desecrated, and scared by the rapists hiding inside all men, the Spirit of Man, then they will turn-around and lash-out at the very things (parents) that spent their whole adult-lives raising them. (God, the Church, Nature, Society, etc.)
By those standards, if I were to go into a room wearing dreadlocks and eating ice cream, I would be objectively wrong. Because I’m “deviating from the norm” by wearing dreadlocks, and my eating of ice cream is a “hedonistic act”.
Surely you don’t think that those qualities by themselves make gay sex wrong.
Also, for a non-Christian, you seem awfully concerned with adhering to distinctively Christian (or at least Abrahamic monotheist) moral standards. Why?
Its the I disagree with MagnetMan thread.
Really…what is your point in this thread MM? Are you arguing against N’s philosophy by virtue of your opinion that his philosophy is bad manners? Is this a rant about how the number of people sharing in your type of belief is steadily decreasing? Is it that Nietzsche is somehow responsible for the steady decline? What is it?
And speaking of zombies…
After 100,000 generations of slavery, freedom can be frightening. But the species has to lose the training wheels sometime.
Nietzshe is out-dated. He was responding to a period that knew nothing about Nuclear theory. He is history, not current. We read history for reflection, not to relive it. The average sophomore is far ahead of him.
My type of belief declining?
I have been initiated into animism, shamanism and yoga - baptized as a Christian and ordained a Zen minister - and I am a an avid student of Planck and Einstein. I can’t be sure where that path is leading me, since nobody I know of is sharing it. So which way is down from there?
Oh? What can you tell me about Einstein or Planck?
Why the hell does nuclear theory have anything to do with preceding philosophy? Certainly it raises new questions, but it doesn’t negate someone’s whole body of work…you still like christianity and Buddhism, do they suffer the same death at the hands of the atom? How about Aristotle?
No, the qualities that make gay sex wrong is enjoy hedonism to the extreme … and making a life & culture out of it. (i.e. Amerikan culture)
Although I am not a Christian, Catholic blood flows through me.
So gay sex isn’t wrong, so long as it’s not enjoyed “to the extreme” (whatever that means)? And so long as you don’t make a life and culture out of it? So what if there’s a loving gay couple that has sex to express their love, just like a heterosexual couple? What if they live moderate, moral, and responsible lives helping others and harming none? Will you condemn their actions because the Catholic catechism tells you so, even though you don’t believe in Catholicism? Isn’t that a pretty weak reason to judge another human being’s actions?
If you are not a Christian, then you do not believe that God inspired Christian doctrine and morals, correct? So they are the work of men. Men who used their experiences, their cultural background, and their history to make judgments about what is right and wrong. That is ultimately how everyone judges morally, whether they take responsibility for their own morality or accept a pre-packaged morality from their fathers. Their judgments were limited by their time and place, which for example told them that women should be submissive and subservient. You now have the opportunity and the responsibility to evaluate their moral judgments, and change them as you see fit. Just as Christians changed the morals of their Jewish fathers. So don’t sit there in religious shackles you’ve already broken – leave the prison of Catholic morality and be free!
They initiated a Nuclear Age consciousness and put an end to petty Steel Age ideas about conventional warfare. On the big stage the central question now is no longer imperial domination. It is either world peace or species annihilation. Since our specie may still be stupid, we are not mad, so Planck and Einstein are the heralds of and eventual end-game of World peace.
The collapsing environment is helping to force all of us towards that conclusion.
Nuclear physics has arrived on the cutting edge of meta-physics. Mass is energy. Energy has no form. How can atoms be both particle and wave at one and the same time? Einstein and Bohr argued over design and randomness without either able to convince the other. The ultimate question for science is “How does consciousness fit into the nuclear equation and what is its purpose?” That trilogy of matter, energy and consciousness is essentially what religion has been inquiring into from the beginning. It seems to me that is why Heisenberg postulated his theory that the observer’s consciousness affects the observed. Whatever the final answer - where religion once persecuted science, the pendulum has now swung the other way. Those extreme positions solve nothing. The answer always required effort from both sides of the brain, analysis and intuition working in harmony.
Aristotle was a necessary religious protester. Without him we would never have arrived at the Nuclear equation. But he would have led science down a more peaceful and more holistic road if he has admitted that his master Plato was essentially right, and that matter cannot be defined by the physical senses alone.
Way to say a whole lot without saying anything. What do you know of the math?
Also, the atomic bomb has been around for over 60 years and we’re still fighting conventionally.
What about photons?
Maybe you should be a little less archaic, a little less in your box (more aligned with the times) and consider the digital age; that consciousness could be information manipulated by energy and not energy itself.
Science is fine the way it is. Religion has been and continues to be more violent and less holistic than science.
As soon as gay sex takes on the mere hint of moral-acceptability, then hedonism has pushed-past its allowable boundary. A culture war is waged, which the US, as the dominant moral specter of the entire world, is looked to from all others for understanding and leadership. What will be the result? Only US knows. The underlying sexual connotation of homosexuality is sex-for-pleasure (a direct pleasure result of the master-slave relationship), which is the antithesis to Christian principles. At the heart of Christianity are pious morals, not hedonistic morals. I cannot speak on behalf of Jesus, but I would search his authentic, written words for more a more authoritative stance about these matters. Either way, Christianity teaches to the West that its (Greek) Institution of Marriage was formed for specific reasons. Because gays and Atheists seek to definitively-destroy this institution, by making a blasphemous-mockery out of it, there arises a necessary conflict. That is where we are at. The concept of ‘marriage’ should only be allowed to a ‘man’ and ‘woman’ in order to maintain its religious sanctimony and spiritual rites.
Basically, I don’t personally give-a-shit if a couple of fags want to butt-fuck each other. I understand, empathize, and even sympathize with the harassment they receive. But I don’t really give-a-shit in the end, like I said, because it doesn’t apply to me in general. When it starts coming to Marriage though, then I have something to say. I have an opinion and I would like to voice it. So I voice it now and at other times. I am not a ‘religious’ person, but even I have an opinion on these matters. Christianity is falling apart, granted. However, I will not allow anybody to desecrate a broken man. There is no need for it. So, you have a couple of apes in wedding dresses on one hand. → that does not make them a Man and Woman. They are merely-pretending to be a Man and Woman; that is why it personally-disgusts me. And on the other hand, you have a queer guy/girl spitting on Christians, right in their face!!!
Let me just put it this way: I would hate to be on either side of that fence. I am fortunate that I am not.
No, I condemn their actions, because I know where it causes other people harm. I have seen it with my own eyes.
My ex-girlfriend has a gay father and it traumatized her and inevitably-led to her being raped by a guy when she was a teenager.
So when anybody tells me “there’s nothing wrong with being gay or gay marriage”, I feel like I want to cold-cock their face.
Being gay is not a fucking “lifestyle choice”. It is more metaphysical than that. It is a way-of-being amoral (i.e. queer).
It would be a weak reason if it were true, but it is not true.
That is not correct; I know God inspired the Christine doctrine and morals.
I just do not bow down to Jesus; I respect him though. And I am a polytheist as well.
Okay.
I already am “free”, I guess. I just do not believe in silly religious things.
Ghost stories should be listened to, but not taken seriously, if you are a man.
Women and children have the luxury of not-knowing.
So sex is wrong if it can’t result in a baby? Why? Who does it hurt?
If you take Jesus as an authority on anything then you’re still a slave to organized religion. He was a good man, a liberator, a guide towards a better future, but he is no more an authority than Buddha or Pastor Jones or any other man. Use your own moral compass. Don’t abdicate moral responsibility to an authority figure.
Oh really? Where is this blasphemous mockery? Two men or two women want to commit to love and care for each other for life, and want society to accept and acknowledge that. What offends you so much about this? You say they are spitting in your face by doing this, but how are they harming you or anyone else?
I’m sorry that she suffered, whatever the cause was. But I have a couple things to say.
First, how exactly did the gay father’s gayness, in itself, traumatize her and cause her to be raped?
Second, even if you can explain that, you are tarring all gays with the same brush because of the wrongs of one. So when one person from a minority group does something bad, you have the right to demonize and punish the rest. Well guess what, black people attacked me and spread nasty rumors about me when I was a boy. Based on your reasoning, I now have a right to hate all black people, prohibit them from marrying whites, keep them out of shops, herd them into shitty schools, and lynch them when they misbehave.
Stereotyping a whole group based on the bad actions of a few is the very worst type of discrimination.
It hurts whoever participates in the act if they neither acknowledge nor pay respect to procreation.
Male semen is a sacred thing. It is a shame to waste it. But I understand that people are allowed their hypocrisies.
Nobody is perfect.
But Jesus is an authority. He is the Western Moral Authority. Any man of great respect must be paid his dues…
He single-handedly destroyed the Roman Empire and built the Amerikan Empire from its ashes; the US was a Christ-ian Nation.
Like I said, two gays marrying is the same thing as dressing up two apes in human clothes and calling them humans…
Likewise, two gays do not represent a Man & Woman. To allow them to emulate a married couple is an abomination to God.
Nothing offends me about that until children get involved. Gays should not be allowed to raise or teach children, ever. → adults, fine.
Reread what I said…
They are not spitting on my face. I don’t really give-a-shit.
I just feel sympathy for broken Christians. I bet the cross they wear around their necks drags very heavy nowadays.
You don’t need to lie to me; you are not sorry. You don’t really care. That’s fine with me though.
First of all, there is no such thing as “gayness-in-itself”, so you are rhetorically-misleading me.
His gayness is the result of an enhanced feminization of his spirit. He appears and acts very womanly, due to reasons that are beyond me. They are both genetic & memetic, and I do not need to understand them fully in order to observe the reasons, causes, and consequences of his behaviors. Him and his politician wife (a devout Feminist) divorced when my ex was very young. He left her and was not a good father to her at all. I mean, that should be obvious anyway. – he’s gay. However, because she was raised without a father-figure in her life, she was not protected by a (alpha, beta, omega) male of any kind. Without a male present to watch over her, she was extremely susceptible to “bad boys”. She wanted to change them. The first one raped her. The subsequent two treated her poorly. The third one semi-raped and semi-abused her I would say. Then I came along and undid a lot of harm & damage done within her. It was a very, very long road for the both of us…
Regardless, I know the cause of her troubles: a bad father. Now you may go on to say, “A bad father is a bad father!!!”, but then you would be a bleeding-heart hypocrite to not also address & include how her gay father essentially-destroyed her happiness as a child. I was there. I experienced first-hand the aftereffects. And I was on cleanup detail. It took a lot of life out of me in the end, and I feel tired even after writing this shit.
I already-addressed this.
I am not blaming “being gay” for my ex-girlfriend’s misery. However, there is a definitive affect and correlation to homosexuality and harms. I have seen them. And even though you may lie to yourself about your experiences with black people, there is a little bit of truth in every stereotype…
You are allowed to judge a group of people for what the group does. Individual accountability is something different. But, as I see it, it is strictly-ignorant and arrogant to purport to me that by “being gay”, “being white”, or “being black” does not have affect on general behaviors. → because they do! Black people are most likely to be ‘thugs’, ‘rappers’, ‘gangsters’, ‘homies’, and ‘niggaz’. Does this make me racist to say it? – no. There is merely a correlation to actions, consequences, and affects within all things.
Personally-speaking, if I were black, then I would be ashamed more than anything at how my “bruthaz” act. It is laughable and disgusting to me. I understand fun & games are okay sometimes, but black “culture” seems like a clown show to me. Whenever I hear a rap song (and I do listen to them because I enjoy them) it seems like 99.9% of the time the black rappers are rapping about hos, bitches, shorties, big dicks, money, money, money, money, money, money, and who makes the most money.
It just seems pathetic to me. (personally-speaking)
(Everybody is entitled to their “opinion” right?)
You have reported a “correlation” based on a single case. But same-sex parenting is already common, and studies by professional organizations like the American Psychological Association and American Medical Association indicate that same-sex parents raise children about as well as a mother and a father. Several links to the relevant studies can be found here.
Parents for adoptive children are in short supply. Those children who don’t get parents often slip through the cracks in the system, and end up in bad foster homes or orphanages or on the streets. Reducing the supply of good couples qualified to adopt based on flimsy-to-no evidence backed by homophobic prejudices is against their interests.
It is sad what happened to your girlfriend, but when you irrationally and unsupportedly generalize from her case to all gays, you hurt children in desperate need of a home. Your prejudices become their bruises and neglect. You should either defend your position with real scientific evidence, or reconsider.
At any rate, coming back to the point of this discussion, you haven’t given us any objective reasons to think that gay sex is wrong. You’ve said it’s sex which seeks pleasure and not procreation, but what’s wrong with that? And what about the bonding purposes of sex? Those can apply to gay couples as well. You’ve said that it’s against God-given Christian morals, but where’s the evidence for that? How do you know God inspired Christian morals? You don’t even believe in the fundamental precept of Christianity, that Jesus was God who died for our sins. Why would you believe that Christian morals are God-inspired when the Church that created them is based on fundamentally false doctrine? How did they happen to get nonsense doctrine but the right morals?
Well, unfortunately he’s right. Christianity does have a great deal of distaste for things physical and places value in restraint, restriction and the transcendant. Oh, this too, too sullied (or solid) flesh.
To be his messenger one should not be sexual.
Not to mention the myth around Mary.
It is as if one should walk through the world on tiptoes, suppressing all that is participatory in matter - note the 7 deadly sins - while waiting for the ephemeral afterlife.
This does not mean there were not good things about Christianity or that a Christian must be anti-life, but there is a bias against immanence.
All you say may be true. But you do not pull down a house and leave it in ruins, especially one that a million martyrs died for. Nietzsche and his like have made the world empty and largely meaningless. The corporate spires ring no bells except for the tinny tinkle of endless the cash registers. When you slay God, only the devil is left.
So what is your point?
I am here to convince myself of my points before you. That single case is my Life. It convinces me very well.
You divert the argument here. Why do I care about this stuff within the context of our previous points???
I will even grant you it. Gays make the perfect parents to mind-slave children. They will become society’s tools implicitly.
(to become used & abused by the social deviants, or the higher-ups)
I see that it produces weakness and only-weakness…
Do not slander me. I did not generalize her case to all gays!
I have other experiences of gay people in my life doing harm. Here’s another just for fun:
A gay man, a convicted child-molester, sexually-assaulted one of my college roommates while he was asleep. – interesting, hmm?
You are redirecting the argument poorly. I do not allow you to make that point.
That’s not true at all. I don’t own “being gay”. I don’t think I’ve ever enjoyed fantasizing the thought of me and another male…
Says you.
I already-presented my position well-enough. What is “science” going to do for me when they can’t even prove a ‘gay’-gene?
That was not ever my intention. The objective reasoning is more spiritual.
Why should anybody condone/allow/accept two gay males to have sex? You tell me.
Let me guess the words you will echo … Kant? ← “Everybody is entitled” (to their so-called “rights”).
Ask a Christian. They will convince you better than I can.
WHAT GOOD IS BONDING IF YOU TREAT YOUR OTHER LIKE A WHORE?!
The ‘bonding’ aspect of sex is biologically-necessitated strictly-for parenting the offspring. Do you see now?
It cannot when gays do not procreate…
I need “evidence” now to prove God-given Christian morals???
Have you ever seriously-argued a point before in your life?
Christians told me that He did and I believed that they were not lying to me.
Quit slandering me. How do you know what I do or do not believe?
I believe that Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins. Even if he was, then I still do not call him my Lord.
I want to die for my own “sins”. I do not want his help. I never asked for it; I never will. If you want something done right, then…
First, tell me how do you know they are “false”.
Do you even know the difference between ‘nonsense’ and ‘morals’???
Why the hell would I care about watching you convince yourself of your own points? Your notion of a conversation is a waste of everyone’s time. I’m not interested in further debate. I would however be interested in listening to an explanation of the following:
So…
-you’re a polytheist
-but you believe that Jesus might have been God who died for your sins
-but even if he was you wouldn’t call him Lord
-but you defer to Christians for explanation of your morality.
…how does this work exactly?
Are you aware that in the Gospels,
- Jesus prescribed hellfire for those who don’t repent and follow him
- Jesus commanded that people follow the ten commandments
- the first of the ten commandments says “you shall have no other gods before me?”
Are you okay with going to hell or something?