|
|
|
|
Hobbes
New Member
USA
34 Posts |
 Posted - 07/09/2002 : 03:09:31
|
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 03:32:15 [Permalink]
|
I'm not sure why the question is important. What is the definition of immoral that you're working with?
I'm not sure about the phrase 'actualize a common good.' If two people like it, and it's not hurting anyone else, then there is a common good established between the two and eventually, a common good is established with a community of homosexuals.
Biblical arguments are, of course, irrelevant. Definitions that I find of the word immoral includes some kind of "accepted standards" or "divine standards." Who cares what's accepted or supposedly divine? Certainly, how other people are going to react is an important consideration, but other people also do stupid things like believe in gods, so why should I be overly concerned about them?
quote:
Hey there folks.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
 |
|
|
Hobbes
New Member
USA
34 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 04:18:59 [Permalink]
|
Well, in the class, we're discussing it in terms of vice vs. virtue. I guess Finnis is trying to make it sound bad by making it sound like a vice. As for "actualizing a common good", Finnis defines common good as the possibility of procreation in addition to advancement and celebration of friendship. It's a rather existentialist arguement though.
However, I don't share his view; I think individual sexuality is a matter for a) the individual, and b) the person(s) they are intimate with. Public reaction is irrelavant as well, though it tends to have an influence. How many homosexual couples do you see holding hands vs. hetersexual couples?
And Newton said, "y'= lim h->0 of [f(x+h)-f(x)]/[(x+h)-x], thus, Calculus was born, and Newton saw that it was good. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 04:38:38 [Permalink]
|
Lack of procreation is a sign that something is immoral?
quote:
As for "actualizing a common good", Finnis defines common good as the possibility of procreation in addition to advancement and celebration of friendship.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 04:47:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Lack of procreation is a sign that something is immoral?
I like that idea, it would make it a moral imperative for older men to divorce their wives in favour of younger still fertile woman half their age.
Yes inabilty or unwill to procreat is definetly evil. I point to his holiness the Pope as exhibit (A).
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 11:25:00 [Permalink]
|
Since morals are subjective, depending entirely on the society you are in and the time you are in, the answer would be Yes and No.
For instance;
Time: today. Place: San Francisco
Sure, no problem, it's completely moral. In fact we just had a parade to celebrate it. Any opposition to it is considered immoral.
Time: today. Place: Kingdom of Tonga
No way in Hell, any support of it is considered immoral.
Time: 1880. Place: San Francisco
No way in Hell, any support of it is considered immoral.
Time: 1700. Place: Kingdom of Tonga
Sure, no problem, live and let live.
Morals really have nothing to do with an individuals choice; they are the customs of a society. An individual is moral or not depending on how well they follow socialital rules. These rules aren't static but-like everything else in this world-they evolve.
The morals involving homosexuality have evolved. Once upon at time it was moral to burn them alive. They were even called faggots after the bundles of sticks used to start a fire. Today they are the subject of parades down Main Street. They haven't changed one bit, but morality has.
The only problem with morality evolving is when you have one group that sees morality not being the product of human society but coming from "outside". Morality ceases to be human and morphic but becomes codified. Written in stone, as it were, but the finger of god it becomes petrified, frozen in time.
Since societies morals have changed over time, while the fish people's morals have not, the two have ceased to match. Xians complain long and bitterly over this, accusing the "secular world" of being immoral. HOWEVER, since it is society that dictates what is moral and what is not, it is religion, with it's out-dated morality from a different epoch, that is actually immoral.
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 13:04:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
My stance on the issue is that an individual's sexual orientation is nobody else's god-damned business, and I think Finnis is arguing an indefensible position. And also, if you agree with me, feel free to comment.... (Note: I'm not trying to start a fight; I just want to refine my own opinion and get some opposing viewpoints) Thanx
I'm just so sick and tired of other people trying to tell anyone else what to do I can't give any logical or intelligent(not that I do anyway, ) answer to your post.
If that Finnis guy was in my face I'd give him a punch. Shut up all you assholes who don't like gays and mind your own business.
That's my answer and if you don't like it, I'll punch you too.
* * * * * *
*Carabao forever.
-----------------
Bye, bye Los Angeles. SAN FERNANDO VALLEY SECESSION - YES.
|
|
|
|
Xev
Skeptic Friend
USA
329 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2002 : 13:24:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I like that idea, it would make it a moral imperative for older men to divorce their wives in favour of younger still fertile woman half their age.
It also makes fellatio unethical.
Ah, I love the sweet sound of bad arguments collapsing to logic. 
----------
Every problem has a solution. Only sometimes the solutions involve imaginary numbers and make my head hurt. |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2002 : 02:10:34 [Permalink]
|
If the purpose of a sexual or intimate relationship is purely for precreation, then this would extent beyond the realm of homosexual relationships and move into the heterosexual relationships as well, making even birth control, condoms, the pill, rythym (sp?) method all immoral choices.
That's actually only if I understand the reasoning properly. Um, well, actually that sounds like the argument that the catholic church uses for condeming the use of birth control methods.
---
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young |
|
|
|
Dr Shari
Skeptic Friend
135 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2002 : 03:16:56 [Permalink]
|
A loving bond between two people is a positive influence in society. This includes homosexual relationships. I have no problem with gay or lesbian individuals and believe it to be a normal variation in human sexuality. That said I will now play Devils Advocate for a second.
Long held societal beliefs hold promiscuity to be immoral or at least unacceptable. Religion aside, most people, even skeptics, tend to wince at the idea of someone having a large number of multiple sexual partners. Studies have shown that gay men on average have a higher number of casual sexual partners then any other group of people as a whole. Casual sex and multiple sexual partners raises the chance of catching an STD. Some of these diseases are life threatening, all are contagious and have a negitive impact on those infected. Illness and disease among prostitutes proves this.So if homosexuality has a high incidence of promiscuity then it is detrimental to the common good of society.
We often have a tendancy to confuse "morality with religous standards but I think sexual restraint in modern society is a neccessity in both hetero and homosexuality.
I guess a few decades of treating AIDS, Hep C, women who have cervical cancer, syphilis, gonnarhea, unwanted pregnancy (this may be the only place where homosexuality is ahead of the promiscuity game)etc. a more conservative sexual lifestyle is for the common good of society. This may be off target from the subject but I think it is a valid point.
Forgive the typos I have been up 2 days may be a little fuzzy right now.
Death: The High Cost of Living
It is easier to get forgiveness then to get permission! |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 07/10/2002 : 23:40:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Long held societal beliefs hold promiscuity to be immoral or at least unacceptable
I hate to disagree with the Devil or even you Doc.
But IMO, and I think I've also heard, that the idea that gay men are more promiscuis is a myth. And that actually they are or can be very stable. I have no statistics but I do believe I saw that somewhere.
I further believe that if society wants to portray them that way, they are being used as scapegoats to cover up all the other things the rest of society does.
* * * * * *
*Carabao forever.
-----------------
Bye, bye Los Angeles. SAN FERNANDO VALLEY SECESSION - YES.
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 07/11/2002 : 06:00:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But IMO, and I think I've also heard, that the idea that gay men are more promiscuis is a myth.
I certainly don't have any statistics or anything, but I've heard numerous news stories (a couple of them local) that seem to bear out the idea that gay men are much more promiscuous.
Web sites that list places to go, such as rest areas and public parks where you can just meet other men and have free sex.
Nearby Wheeler State Park had a problem, a local city nature trail had a problem, a nearby rest area had a problem. People were walking along and coming upon men having sex with each other. ("Sex" being defined here as anything from hand jobs to actual intercourse). Not just one or two cases, but regular occurances with many different men.
Now maybe it's the media not reporting it, but I've not heard of any stories in which men can go meet women in public places and have free sex. (Let me know if you know of any!  )
But if we look at it from a more clinical standpoint, it seems reasonable that gay men would be more promiscuous (though I have no idea if they are). Males have a much more profound sex drive. I believe that men in general have a sex drive that would be conducive to quick free sex pretty much as often as possible. Get men with this drive who like having sex with other men who have an equally powerful sex drive, and watch out!
(If my wife had a male sex drive, we'd never leave the house, I can assure you of that!  )
------------
You can tell she's hydrolic...
Her silver scream is supersonic
You can see the mercury smear in her eye... |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 07/11/2002 : 17:27:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Nearby Wheeler State Park had a problem, a local city nature trail had a problem, a nearby rest area had a problem. People were walking along and coming upon men having sex with each other. ("Sex" being defined here as anything from hand jobs to actual intercourse). Not just one or two cases, but regular occurances with many different men.
Now maybe it's the media not reporting it, but I've not heard of any stories in which men can go meet women in public places and have free sex. (Let me know if you know of any! )
But if we look at it from a more clinical standpoint, it seems reasonable that gay men would be more promiscuous (though I have no idea if they are). Males have a much more profound sex drive. I believe that men in general have a sex drive that would be conducive to quick free sex pretty much as often as possible. Get men with this drive who like having sex with other men who have an equally powerful sex drive, and watch out!
Here where I live, there are only a couple of places known for where gays hang out. Whoops, perhaps that doesn't sound right. Too tired to think another way to say it.
Anyway, there are not that many places for them yet there are dozens of known places where one can pick up a female prostitute. (I'll email you them if you really want).
Your argument is wrong, if men and I don't disagree, have the sex drive you say, then what does it matter if they are gay or not, they will try to satisfy it in either case. You can get just as much quick sex from a female as a male.
Nothing like a good quickie!
BTW, we have a Wheeler forest here too but from what I can see it's not as you describe.
Griffith Park in Los Angeles was the place where the gay guys would be, just like you said. They'd stand by the trails too.
But on Sunset and Hollywood Blvd and so many other place in the city on the sidewalks is where the women are. IMO, more men are looking for women than men looking for men. From what I see. Maybe I live too sheltered a life.
* * * * * *
*Carabao forever.
-----------------
Bye, bye Los Angeles. SAN FERNANDO VALLEY SECESSION - YES.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
