User Tag List

Page 5 of 42 FirstFirst ... 234567815 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 629

Thread: Homosexuality will destroy this and any country and needs to be recriminalized

  1. #61
    Over 3000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,894
    Thanks
    332
    Thanked 880 Times in 715 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    203637
    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    Yes, a moral zeitgeist.
    Agreed. And this shift, itself, could make a group "better" or "worse," morally, right?

    For example - the moral shift that took place in Germany following WWI was undoubtedly a change for the worse.
    The moral shift that took place during the Civil Rights Movement in the United States was undoubtedly a change for the better.

    If we base our morality on the current moral zeitgeist of society, how can a society determine if that current shift is a good change or a bad one?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  2. #62
    Over 4000 post club alwight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Isle Of Wight UK
    Posts
    4,773
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 229 Times in 142 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    366452
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Agreed. And this shift, itself, could make a group "better" or "worse," morally, right?

    For example - the moral shift that took place in Germany following WWI was undoubtedly a change for the worse.
    The moral shift that took place during the Civil Rights Movement in the United States was undoubtedly a change for the better.

    If we base our morality on the current moral zeitgeist of society, how can a society determine if that current shift is a good change or a bad one?
    I don't think that society sets out to determine what actually is good or bad, it decides for itself whatever it decides by a general consensus and whatever works for them.
    Others can then conclude for themselves, perhaps with hindsight from a different society or time, just how good or bad they think it was. We can however learn from mistakes in the past, I doubt that slavery will ever be seen as acceptable again just as I suspect that homophobic bigotry will never again get the state support it once had, at least in modern societies that have accepted change.
    Perhaps you don't agree and that there are absolute rights and wrongs?

  3. #63
    Over 3000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,894
    Thanks
    332
    Thanked 880 Times in 715 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    203637
    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    I don't think that society sets out to determine what actually is good or bad, it decides for itself whatever it decides by a general consensus and whatever works for them.
    Others can then conclude for themselves, perhaps with hindsight from a different society or time, just how good or bad they think it was.


    Yes - the fact that we are able to do this means that we do, at an individual level, appeal to a standard external to society itself. I'm very interested in what that standard is for each person; and why they accept that particular standard.


    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    We can however learn from mistakes in the past, I doubt that slavery will ever be seen as acceptable again just as I suspect that homophobic bigotry will never again get the state support it once had, at least in modern societies that have accepted change. Perhaps you don't agree and that there are absolute rights and wrongs?
    I do think a "greatest good" exists. And I believe every thought, word, and action moves us closer or further from it. I would argue that you probably believe the same, that all of us do. This is what makes us capable of evaluating the goodness or badness of any society (or person) at all.

    When you say, for example, that slavery is unacceptable, you are saying that its abolition was a move in the right direction - that it brought us closer (not further) to some ideal.

    My question is, then, what is that standard? What is that ideal?
    Whatever it is, it is an absolute. It must be a principle external to society, if it can be used to evaluate society.
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  4. #64
    Over 4000 post club alwight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Isle Of Wight UK
    Posts
    4,773
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 229 Times in 142 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    366452
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Yes - the fact that we are able to do this means that we do, at an individual level, appeal to a standard external to society itself. I'm very interested in what that standard is for each person; and why they accept that particular standard.
    Only we are all individuals and may well modify our standards over time.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    I do think a "greatest good" exists. And I believe every thought, word, and action moves us closer or further from it. I would argue that you probably believe the same, that all of us do. This is what makes us capable of evaluating the goodness or badness of any society (or person) at all.
    An absolute good?
    I think you must be referring to an aspiration rather than an actual extant fixed standard or absolute benchmark. I'd suggest that such an aspiration is actually a mirage which doesn't really exist and you may as well go looking for the crock of gold at the end of a rainbow.
    Otoh although I don't believe in any gods I will agree that a perfect divine entity/god could perhaps, possibly set or represent such standards. But even then that would amount to nothing if any human go-betweens were part of the process.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    When you say, for example, that slavery is unacceptable, you are saying that its abolition was a move in the right direction - that it brought us closer (not further) to some ideal.
    Slavery only had to be deemed sufficiently wrong enough to get it stopped, I don't see any need to worry if there is an absolute objective standard involved.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    My question is, then, what is that standard? What is that ideal?
    Whatever it is, it is an absolute. It must be a principle external to society, if it can be used to evaluate society.
    As a presumably fallible human how would you even recognise an absolute moral standard anyway?
    Do you want something to point to if someone else has a slightly different version from yours, perhaps if they were written in tablets of stone?
    Then we would perhaps all know if our moral values were slipping.

  5. #65
    Over 3000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,894
    Thanks
    332
    Thanked 880 Times in 715 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    203637
    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    An absolute good?
    I think you must be referring to an aspiration rather than an actual extant fixed standard or absolute benchmark. I'd suggest that such an aspiration is actually a mirage which doesn't really exist and you may as well go looking for the crock of gold at the end of a rainbow.
    This is it. That's the difference between our philosophies. Do ideals exist? Do ideas exist? Does anything immaterial exist?

    I don't hope to get too off-topic (it may be too late), but have you read a lot of what Plato has written on this subject?


    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    Otoh although I don't believe in any gods I will agree that a perfect divine entity/god could perhaps, possibly set or represent such standards. But even then that would amount to nothing if any human go-betweens were part of the process.

    I am in agreement.

    How might a perfect, divine entity account for this situation?

    ...Perhaps by assigning Himself the role of mediator.


    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    Slavery only had to be deemed sufficiently wrong enough to get it stopped, I don't see any need to worry if there is an absolute objective standard involved.
    "Wrong," here, means falling short of some ideal, does it not?

    Try this: The end of slavery in the United States was good because it made the country more ________.

    I'd say any descriptor you can fit into that blank space is an absolute (not relative) moral ideal. And one that you (and I, and everyone) actually use to evaluate how "good" or "bad" something is, morally.

    I think people are unaware of how much they actually do appeal to moral absolutes.


    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    As a presumably fallible human how would you even recognise an absolute moral standard anyway?
    I might not. This problem necessitates certain philosophical solutions. Few theologies address this issue. Incidentally, it's one of the reasons I eventually came to reject Protestantism.

    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    Do you want something to point to if someone else has a slightly different version from yours, perhaps if they were written in tablets of stone? Then we would perhaps all know if our moral values were slipping.
    Again, forcing my moral beliefs on someone else does no good for anyone. I simply won't do it. People must make moral decisions freely (this, too, is affirmed by Catholic teaching).

    But I do think people ought to consider which moral standards they appeal to - it's worth knowing what your "greatest good" is.
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  6. #66
    Over 4000 post club alwight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Isle Of Wight UK
    Posts
    4,773
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 229 Times in 142 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    366452
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    This is it. That's the difference between our philosophies. Do ideals exist? Do ideas exist? Does anything immaterial exist?

    I don't hope to get too off-topic (it may be too late), but have you read a lot of what Plato has written on this subject?
    I think we can certainly have our own standards and ideals, but no such independent absolutes need exist imo.
    Apart from the Plato that I may have accidentally come across from time to time, as you do, probably none.
    How am I doing?
    Am I trying to teach grandma to suck eggs here?

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    I am in agreement.

    How might a perfect, divine entity account for this situation?

    ...Perhaps by assigning Himself the role of mediator.
    Well I at least am not going to accept any absolute morality from anyone human claiming to be His spokesperson on Earth.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    "Wrong," here, means falling short of some ideal, does it not?
    I'm no Plato but I recognise that physical and mathematical absolutes that are provable exist, but here I am maintaining that moral values and standards are relative abstract human constructs only.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Try this: The end of slavery in the United States was good because it made the country more ________.
    My first thought was "egalitarian" btw.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    I'd say any descriptor you can fit into that blank space is an absolute (not relative) moral ideal. And one that you (and I, and everyone) actually use to evaluate how "good" or "bad" something is, morally.

    I think people are unaware of how much they actually do appeal to moral absolutes.
    Again how would you even know if such absolutes existed, if you can't measure or prove them mathematically?
    Religions may make their bald assertions but I've never seen any substance.
    I think as genetically similar beings we tend to have rather closely matched ideals innately that often do point in the same general direction.

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    I might not. This problem necessitates certain philosophical solutions. Few theologies address this issue. Incidentally, it's one of the reasons I eventually came to reject Protestantism.
    In practice we only have a human relative morality to go by, I really don't think that navel gazing about it is of any value unless philosophy for its own sake is your hobby, or unless the Almighty puts in an appearance perhaps?

    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Again, forcing my moral beliefs on someone else does no good for anyone. I simply won't do it. People must make moral decisions freely (this, too, is affirmed by Catholic teaching).

    But I do think people ought to consider which moral standards they appeal to - it's worth knowing what your "greatest good" is.
    I'm rather suspicious of any institutions that claim to know of absolute moral or godly standards since they appear to want to take away human relative values and replace them with their own. There may not be anything particularly wrong with them but they don't actually know they are godly absolutes any more than I know they aren't.

  7. #67
    Over 3000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,894
    Thanks
    332
    Thanked 880 Times in 715 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    203637
    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    I think we can certainly have our own standards and ideals, but no such independent absolutes need exist imo.


    Apart from the Plato that I may have accidentally come across from time to time, as you do, probably none.
    How am I doing?
    Am I trying to teach grandma to suck eggs here?
    He's worth talking about, and worth reading.
    (I do think this thread has become a bit derailed. )


    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    Well I at least am not going to accept any absolute morality from anyone human claiming to be His spokesperson on Earth.
    I agree. Nothing should be believed without reason.




    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    I'm no Plato but I recognise that physical and mathematical absolutes that are provable exist, but here I am maintaining that moral values and standards are relative abstract human constructs only.
    Interestingly, that's where Plato starts, too. He gives the example of a circle. A circle is a real thing, but it's not material. And, in fact, does not exist anywhere in the material world.



    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    My first thought was "egalitarian" btw.

    And why is it good to be egalitarian?



    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    Again how would you even know if such absolutes existed, if you can't measure or prove them mathematically?
    There are some things we know must exist through reason alone, without need for measurement or mathematical proof.

    Example: I exist. (St. Augustine came up with that before Descartes, BTW)

    Another Example: Truth exists. (If it didn't, then the statement, "No truth exists" would in fact be an existing truth. )



    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    In practice we only have a human relative morality to go by, I really don't think that navel gazing about it is of any value unless philosophy for its own sake is your hobby, or unless the Almighty puts in an appearance perhaps?
    Right on!


    Quote Originally Posted by alwight View Post
    I'm rather suspicious of any institutions that claim to know of absolute moral or godly standards since they appear to want to take away human relative values and replace them with their own. There may not be anything particularly wrong with them but they don't actually know they are godly absolutes any more than I know they aren't.
    If I told you I am of the same mentality, I suspect you might not believe me!
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  8. #68
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    14,765
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,769 Times in 2,544 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    [Don't Answer Loaded Questions by Ray Comfort] "How do you answer this question (asked by homosexuals who believe that they were born with same sex preference): "Did you choose to be a heterosexual?" It's important not to answer this question with a yes or a no. This is because it's loaded, similar to "Do you still beat up your mother? Yes or no." Their question equates heterosexuality with homosexuality, when the Bible does no such thing. Instead of a yes or no, point to 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: "Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterous nor homosexuals...will inherit the kingdom of God." Explain that each of these practices are sins in God's eyes, and they are sins that we choose. We choose to be a fornicator, or to be an adulterer, and we choose to be a homosexual. Then take the person through the Ten Commandments to show him that he's in big trouble on Judgment Day, despite his sexual preference. That's what you see happening in "Audacity." (Learn more about the movie at www.AudacityMovie.com.)" Ray Comfort on Facebook

  9. #69
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In front of the strange glowing screen of an inexplicable mechanism.
    Posts
    3,641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 43 Times in 43 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173059
    I see the Kingdom of God on earth coming. And probably the best thing to do is for both sides to be unyielding in the argument. I have faith that sooner or later the global culture will open up more liberty and justice for all, as well as a life with dignity.

    The losers will eventually marginalize and condemn themselves.



    "HIGHER GROUND"

    Stevie Wonder


    People keep on learnin'
    Soldiers keep on warrin'
    World keep on turnin'
    Cause it won't be too long

    Powers keep on lyin'
    While your people keep on dyin'
    World keep on turnin'
    Cause it won't be too long

    I'm so darn glad he let me try it again
    Cause my last time on earth I lived a whole world of sin
    I'm so glad that I know more than I knew then
    Gonna keep on tryin'
    Till I reach my highest ground

    Teachers keep on teachin'
    Preachers keep on preachin'
    World keep on turnin'
    Cause it won't be too long
    Oh no

    Lovers keep on lovin'
    Believers keep on believin'
    Sleepers just stop sleepin'
    Cause it won't be too long
    Oh no

    I'm so glad that he let me try it again
    Cause my last time on earth I lived a whole world of sin
    I'm so glad that I know more than I knew then
    Gonna keep on tryin'
    Till I reach my highest ground...Whew!

    Till I reach my highest ground
    No one's gonna bring me down
    Oh no
    Till I reach my highest ground
    Don't let nobody bring you down (they'll sho 'nuff try)
    God is gonna show you higher ground
    He's the only friend you have around
    ____________________________________
    ...terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich...




    (STILL trying to set up conservatives and fundamentalists on blind dates with Jesus...)

  10. #70
    Over 4000 post club alwight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Isle Of Wight UK
    Posts
    4,773
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked 229 Times in 142 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    366452
    I'll just answer this in case we start going in circles.
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    And why is it good to be egalitarian?
    Actually it depends on what "good" actually means, which is a relative opinion.
    It could perhaps be "better" if someone really clever and selfless was empowered to control us in such a way that we all became better off and more prosperous and did an equal share of the work.
    But I think that most people will want to feel that they are mainly in control of their own lives.
    Given that is true then it is simply not justifiable to do so by controlling the lives of others, in this case slaves, no matter how much "good" it did for slave owners' bank balances. Egalitarian only in the sense of tending toward equality since in practice it may never actually happen, and perhaps being too dogmatic about it may even force equality where it isn't wanted or asked for.
    It's good to be an egalitarian imo, not having to justify oppressing others which in this thread's case, gay people. (to be on topic for a moment )

  11. #71
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    14,765
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2,769 Times in 2,544 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    [Story written as if he is a woman ] Caitlyn Jenner Could Face Manslaughter Charge

    Deut 22:5, Mt 19:4
    Last edited by serpentdove; August 21st, 2015 at 03:58 PM.

  12. #72
    Over 500 post club kiwimacahau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Deepest, Darkest NZ
    Posts
    700
    Thanks
    51
    Thanked 120 Times in 91 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    77833
    What a lot of rubbish this thread is.
    "...It is folly it is madness to suppose that you can worship Jesus in the Sacraments and Jesus on the throne of glory, when you are sweating him in the souls and bodies of his children." -- Bishop Frank Weston, 1923 Anglo-Catholic Congress


    Father Ray McIntyre
    Anglican Church International

  13. #73
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    281
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1068
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Agreed. And this shift, itself, could make a group "better" or "worse," morally, right?

    For example - the moral shift that took place in Germany following WWI was undoubtedly a change for the worse.
    The moral shift that took place during the Civil Rights Movement in the United States was undoubtedly a change for the better.

    If we base our morality on the current moral zeitgeist of society, how can a society determine if that current shift is a good change or a bad one?
    We could look at whether it is a change which reflects that we are all human beings and whether or not the shift is focused on making life better for the majority of people by expanding, to as much an extent as possible, liberty and prosperity with as little exploitation of others as possible.

    It's not perfect, but it's MUCH better than looking to some random book that claims to be from some random deity, be it vishnu, thor, ra, yahweh or allah based on social conditioning and culture. Especially if that book justifies murdering someone for being gay or murdering someone for espousing a different religious belief.

    Before you try to create a theocracy, keep in mind that every theocracy on earth is a horrible place to live or visit.

  14. #74
    Over 3000 post club Quetzal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    3,205
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 247 Times in 167 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    783428
    Quote Originally Posted by TrakeM View Post
    We could look at whether it is a change which reflects that we are all human beings and whether or not the shift is focused on making life better for the majority of people by expanding, to as much an extent as possible, liberty and prosperity with as little exploitation of others as possible.

    It's not perfect, but it's MUCH better than looking to some random book that claims to be from some random deity, be it vishnu, thor, ra, yahweh or allah based on social conditioning and culture. Especially if that book justifies murdering someone for being gay or murdering someone for espousing a different religious belief.

    Before you try to create a theocracy, keep in mind that every theocracy on earth is a horrible place to live or visit.
    That is not true! Saudi Arabia has wonderful beaches!
    -Q
    "The Man. The Myth. The Legend!"

  15. #75
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    9,316
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 485 Times in 445 Posts

    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147689
    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzal View Post
    That is not true! Saudi Arabia has wonderful beaches!
    Indeed! All of those BURKAs flowing in the breeze and condemned females half buried in the sand being stoned to death ....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us