An Aside Regarding Homosexuality

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Balerion, Mar 2, 2014.

  1. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    This topic was created specifically to discuss homosexuality in a moral context with Syne, but feel free to treat it as a broad discussion about homosexuality and morality in general. For those who haven't been following along with my conversation with Syne from another subforum, I refer you to this thread.

    Now, to Syne.

    Now, answer.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    If you look at religious morality, these systems were developed at a time before modern science. The leaders would observed behavior and the cause and effect, but with little in the way of science and technology to clean up any mess due to the behavior. Today, if I cut myself with a dirty knife, I can get a shot, stitches and antibiotics. But back in ancient times, all you could do was wait and see who fell by the wayside. If the number was too high, a rule would appear about dirty knives. But in modern times, there is no need for such a rule, when there are mops of science.

    The same was true with homosexual behavior in ancient times. This will not procreate, while bum blasting is unsanitary. Today this is highly dependent on science for precautions and mops. The ancients did not have these modern mops of science, but would witness high levels of attrition. To save culture, they would institute taboos to slow the attrition. These taboos were placed against any behavior that would not be sustainable under natural conditions, but which today are possible, via artificial additives to compensate.

    In modern times, because science can mop up after many things that are not naturally sustainable, people assume there is no need for ancient natural morality in the modern world of artificial supplements. This is only a half truth, since these mops tends to create an expense for culture, while those who conserved expense, by being moral, are forced to pay for the mops needed to support unnatural behavior.

    One solution, would be not tax the moral, to pay for the social mops needed by immorality. Rather let the immoral cover their own tab. If liberals had to pay for their own mops, this would satisfy the system, since they would be self reliant and would not have to impose on others. But they don't pay for their own mops, but try to impose this preventable expense on those who live in ways that save social costs. This is the real argument.

    Would anyone be willing to run an ancient experiment with homosexuality where you can only use what was around 2000-3000 years ago, which means no mops? One would see high levels of death and disease. If the experiment was forced to run for 10 years, the government would issue a moral law to protect these people from themselves, not to punish them.

    Who would accept the idea that those who practice immorality, in the traditional sense, cover all their expense through higher taxes on just the political party that condones such behavior? Those who practice the cheaper behavior of morality get a tax cut since they are no longer liable for buying mops for others. The resistance is not toward the people, but the imposition of expense for something you don't use.

    Hilary Clinton will raise $2 billion for possible run for president. She can use this to buy mops instead, instead of using this to gain power so she can impose mop buying on those who don't use the mops at the same level. Liberalism like to steal to create an illusion.

    Prove me wrong by running an experiment that is mop free.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Sorcerer Put a Spell on you Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    856
    This is amazing for you! It took until the 4th para for the L word to appear, and only twice in the whole thing!

    I think you'll find that gay people are better paid, and pay more taxes, so they are already paying for the mops. The other lot get tax breaks on their church donations, so your system is already in place.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,132
    May I be the first to say, what in the hell was that word salad?

    Mops? What?

    1) Who is practicing immorality? Homosexuality is not immoral, so who are you suggesting is practicing immorality?

    2) What does death and disease have to do with homosexuality? If you are going to look at ancient times as an experiment, it might behoove you to know and learn that death in that period was not caused by homosexuality:

    While the people of Rome are known to have suffered from plagues, which erupted at various times, the real killers, were infectious diseases like malaria (Plasmodium Falciparium, the most dangerous form), tuberculosis, typhoid fever, and certain digestive ailments like gastroenteritis. Studies suggest that the period from July to October was marked by high mortality, with about 30,000 residents dying each year. Roman authors refer to these months as ‘sickly’ and urge their fellow Romans to flee the city for the healthy climate of the country. Comparatively speaking, there was low mortality form November to February, except for the elderly who were particularly venerable to diseases during the winter months. The most deadly diseases to which Rome’s population routinely succumbed were affected by temperature; in particular, the most lethal form of malaria, which had long incubation period and high temperature requirement, did not reach its peak frequency until autumn. The high death rate from July to October could also have been due to other diseases (like tuberculosis and typhoid) which were rendered lethal form a general weakness of the body due to previo7s malarial attacks. It is estimated that each year several thousand people died in Rome form these diseases, with women and young children aged 1 to 5 especially vulnerable. Given the close quarters in which the urban poor lived, their poor hygiene and undernourishment, as well as the constant influx into the city of migrants who were incapable of fighting these diseases, it is no wonder that infectious diseases were virulent killers.

    And since the greater majority of the population were living in cramped and unhygienic spaces where access to clean water and uncontaminated food was usually scarce, your experiment would clearly show that homosexuality is not a killer.
     
  8. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    You out did yourself this time wellwisher. Wow.
     
  9. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,132

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Think of the children, people!




    Sorry, couldn't help it.

    Umm.. carry on..
     
  10. Sorcerer Put a Spell on you Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    856
    :d:d
     
  11. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    Nice one Bells!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,522
    Bells, nice picture - good looking offspring.

    Were the biological parents of the child in that picture heterosexual or homosexual? Was that child conceived, naturally, through heterosexual or homosexual intercourse?

    In short, and to the point - are any these "children" that we should "think of", the natural result of purely homosexual reproduction?
     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,132
    Don't understand jokes much, do you?
     
  14. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    When you say, "what is right", don't you mean what is right for you and not homosexuals? And, when you say "you", don't you mean what the Bible has taught you to believe about homosexuality?

    And, when you say "what ought to be done", don't you mean what ought to be done about homosexuals based on what the bible has taught you, as well?
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,481
    What attrition was being caused by 5% of the ancient population having gay sex? And what possible significance would such small numbers have compared to the much larger attrition caused by other diseases outlined so well in Bell's post? STD's were a fact of life for everyone who exchanged bodily fluids back then including heterosexuals, who by sheer numbers accounted for far more death and disease in the general population than gay people did. Thank goodness for medical science eh?

    Syphilis: A Sexual Scourge with a Long History

    "Syphilis is a sexually transmitted disease that begins with genital sores, progresses to a general rash, and then to disfiguring abscesses and scabs all over the body. In its late stages, untreated syphilis can cause heart abnormalities, mental disorders, blindness, other neurological problems, and death. It appeared prominently in Europe at the end of the fourteenth century, and by 1500 syphilis had spread to much of the continent. The explorer Vasco da Gama carried it to Calcutta in 1498, and by 1520 syphilis had reached Africa and China. It was considered the sexual scourge of the sixteenth century.

    For centuries, syphilis remained a major component of the infectious disease landscape throughout Europe, Asia, and Africa. The United States has been no stranger to the disease, which most likely arrived with fifteenth- and sixteenth-century explorers. The rate of syphilis peaked in the U.S. in 1947 at 106,000 cases, but was dramatically reduced following the widespread introduction of antibiotics."---

    Read more: Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Syphilis: A Sexual Scourge with a Long History | Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/cig/dange...exual-scourge-long-history.html#ixzz2up6IVL7T
     
  16. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,522
    As a matter of fact I understand humor quite well!

    Have you never heard of acts like George Burns and Gracie Allen, or Abbott and Costello?

    Heck, I even understand most of the Posters on SciForums!
     
  17. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    Yes of course you see right through the thin patina of religious indoctrination. Odd isn't it how the tables have turned? Now look who's hiding in the closet, now that the majority of us are Ok with the folks who only recently came out.
     
  18. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    What the hell is wellwisher talking about?
     
  19. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Homosexuality via home maintenance. Must be alluding to that Seinfeld standup bit.
     
  20. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    Everyone judges others through the same filter they judge themselves, so what is "right for me" necessarily colors my assessment of others. So no, what I think is "right" I apply equally to everyone. That is a meta-ethical question of what is right. I hold the positions of descriptive moral relativism (in that I recognize that morals objectively differ by culture), meta-ethical moral objectivism (in that I believe ethics apply universally), and normative utilitarianism (where the most happiness is sought for the greatest number of people).

    So while I do not think homosexuality is "right", I also do not find any reason that they ought not, so long as no one is harmed. No, my opinions are not based on the Bible. There is nothing that "ought to be done" about homosexuality.
     
  21. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    So, you judge homosexuals the same way as you judge yourself, through the bible filter.

    That is obviously not true based on this:

     
  22. Syne Sine qua non Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,515
    What are you on about (Q)?

    The Bible has nothing to do with why I do not think homosexuality is "right". And there is nothing inconsistent about thinking homosexuality is not "right" and that applying equally for everyone.

    And I guess I lost you with ethical terms, huh?
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2014
  23. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    So what makes you think homosexuality is wrong?
     

Share This Page