Is being gay morally wrong?

[Sidhe]

If we would stick with the definitions given in dictionary's, there would be nothing more to talk about. You could say when people discuss, they discuss definitions.

Good starting point though, if we don't have a consensus about what the word means, further discussion is pointless. Any thread will turn into semantics unless we're grounded in a good meaning before we start, of course we can argue why it's too broad or too narrow but we need to have a ground zero surely?

 

[angeleyes]

Good starting point though, if we don't have a consensus about what the word means, further discussion is pointless. Any thread will turn into semantics unless we're grounded in a good meaning before we start, of course we can argue why it's too broad or too narrow but we need to have a ground zero surely?

Concensus is the goal, not a starting point.

 

[Sidhe]

Concensus is the goal, not a starting point.

In definition it's a starting point believe me, I know this consensus is a goal obviously, it's the most pure goal but without knowing what the hell you're talking about, no goal will ever be reached.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I do not think that being gay is morally wrong.

I should hope not . . .

But like others have said this issue keeps getting brought up, over and over again. The majority of the time neither side will convince the other of their argument.

Indeed, all this thread has accomplished is to demonstrate this fact, and to show how I use funny definitions for some words.

 

[Sidhe]

I apologise, the only idea was to justify your morals, if you or more correctly they can't do that, then perhaps we're at an impasse? Honestly I don't know how to proceed unless we agree on the term morality, I've done that before and ended up with a twenty five page thread, and really don't want to go there again. Suffice to say your only post in justification satisfied me, but no one else has touched a justification, so I think this thread is going to die anyway. I thank you for your efforts. Go with your God.

 

[Xanikk999]

According to my morals its not wrong.

This question has no definite answer because everyones morals are different.

 

[mdwh]

You all keep saying "it doesn't harm anyone", because there is no obvious physical or emotional harm.

But I keep saying that it causes spiritual harm on the grounds that it is a misuse of the ultimate purpose of human sexuality.

Define spiritual harm? How is this measured? What is the purpose of human sexuality, and how does being gay misuse this?

But my view in this case isn't "homosexuality is immoral because God said so" but "God said homosexual acts are immoral because they are".

Okay, but earlier you said:

Shortguy is right; I don't care what 400 million Europeans say, but what God says.

Which sounds an awful lot like you are basing your opinion on what God says, and not whether you think it is wrong.

 

[Sidhe]

Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other sins are invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not sinful--just stupid.)


One man's religion is another man's belly laugh.


The most ridiculous concept ever perpetrated by H.Sapiens is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of the Universes, wants the sacharrine adoration of his creations, that he can be persuaded by their prayers, and becomes petulant if he does not recieve this flattery. Yet this ridiculous notion, without one real shred of evidence to bolster it, has gone on to found one of the oldest, largest and least productive industries in history.


23. It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics. [Robert A. Heinlein, Postscript to Revolt in 2100]


24. But I contend that the disgusting behavior of many of their alleged 'holy men' relieves us of any intellectual obligation to take the stuff seriously. No amount of sanctimonious rationalization can make such behavior anything but pathological.

25. A religion is sometime a source of happiness, and I would not deprive anyone of happiness. But it is a comfort appropriate for the weak, not for the strong. The great trouble with religion - any religion - is that a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, cannot thereafter judge those propositions by evidence. One may bask at the warm fire of faith or choose to live in the bleak certainty of reason- but one cannot have both. [Robert A. Heinlein, from "Friday"]

An author could say it better than I ever could. This is what I think of your rationalisations, those who haven't bothered to say anything but because God told me so.

 

[angeleyes]

In definition it's a starting point believe me, I know this consensus is a goal obviously, it's the most pure goal but without knowing what the hell you're talking about, no goal will ever be reached.

If you take a (consensus) definition as startingpoint, and try to reason further, you'll see you'll get problems and the only way to solve these problems will be to adjust your first definition, over and over again.
For example Bill3000 and Eran of Arcadia will never really agree about there definition on morals unless there worldview becomes completely identical, cause there wordview influence there definition of morals.

 

[Sidhe]

If you take a (consensus) definition as startingpoint, and try to reason further, you'll see you'll get problems and the only way to solve these problems will be to adjust your first definition, over and over again.
For example Bill3000 and Eran of Arcadia will never really agree about there definition on morals unless there worldview becomes completely identical, cause there wordview influence there definition of morals.

True but if they can use it as a start and work out some middle ground then that'll be progress, I find it best to start with the terms of your terms layed out and refined, some people prefer to make up there own plucked out of thin air, but this is just sophistry, if Erin has something similar then how does it differ from this? Are your "morals" only based on God's judgement?

mor·al /ˈmɔrəl, ˈmɒr-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mawr-uhl, mor-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.
2. expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel.
3. founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.
4. capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.
5. conforming to the rules of right conduct (opposed to immoral): a moral man.
6. virtuous in sexual matters; chaste.
7. of, pertaining to, or acting on the mind, feelings, will, or character: moral support.
8. resting upon convincing grounds of probability; virtual: a moral certainty.
–noun
9. the moral teaching or practical lesson contained in a fable, tale, experience, etc.
10. the embodiment or type of something.
11. morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

If we don't define the terms we might as well not bother talking about this any more.

 

[HannibalBarka]

Certainly not. If you use the Bible as your moral book code, than being jewish is also morally wrong.

 

[Sidhe]

Certainly not. If you use the Bible as your moral book code, than being jewish is also morally wrong.

The Jews killed Jesus thus they are morally wrong. That's just the way it works . The belief that Jesus wasn't the Son of God only makes it worse,oh and by Jews I mean you personally killed Jesus, not your ancestors or the Romans or anyone else: you did it, I saw it in a Mel Gibson film

That Roman I mean Jewish centurion driving the nails in, that was you he looked just like you

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Define spiritual harm? How is this measured? What is the purpose of human sexuality, and how does being gay misuse this?

Spiritual harm is not easily quantifiable, but like I said the LDS view is that human sexuality exists, at least in part because attaining godhood requires both a man and a woman. Its ability to do so effectively is reduced when it is used for other purposes so to speak.

Which sounds an awful lot like you are basing your opinion on what God says, and not whether you think it is wrong.

Okay, I base my opinion on what I believe God says because I believe that He only says things are wrong if they are.

@Sidhe: Robert Heinlen can say what he wants . . .

 

[Sidhe]

I know that's the beauty of free speech

 

[mdwh]

Spiritual harm is not easily quantifiable, but like I said the LDS view is that human sexuality exists, at least in part because attaining godhood requires both a man and a woman. Its ability to do so effectively is reduced when it is used for other purposes so to speak.

So what about people who don't have sex at all (either through choice or not)? Are they not able to attain godhood either?

What about bisexual people who do have sex with the opposite sex, but also have had sex with the same sex?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

So what about people who don't have sex at all (either through choice or not)? Are they not able to attain godhood either?

What about bisexual people who do have sex with the opposite sex, but also have had sex with the same sex?

Sex is only part of it. And bisexuals, homosexuals, and heterosexuals who have sex with more than one person have the same situation - they are sinning, but that is what repentance is for. The timeline for all this, so to speak, is not just within the 70-odd years of a mortal lifetime.

 

[Bill3000]

You know, life would be a lot easier if we didn't need faith at all and God just did some freaking obvious divine intervention. Heck, why not a world like like D&D where the gods play a role in everyday life? Not only would it be more interesting, but it would provide a more obvious basis for morality than what we have to come up with...

 

[El_Machinae]

Plus I could learn languages and how to sneak by beating people up

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

And I could summon a wolf out of thin air . . .