 | | christian morals are inferior to tolerant morals —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Why not? You'll have to present an argument other than "from authority" to convince me differently. Assuming we've named all the stakeholders, and they're all consenting adults who actually consented (posit this for the sake of the argument, (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: christian morals are inferior to tolerant morals —David Eaton
|
| | | | | (...) "Larry's morals and David's are equivalently good within your separate personal contexts." :) (...) Interesting note, though. In this particular case, you *haven't* judged David's theoretical person who *wouldn't*, whereas David has actually (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: christian morals are inferior to tolerant morals —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) It wouldn't. (at least absent more particulars anyway...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) Forgetting authority, forget the laws of the land and forget the laws of the bible nad foget that I'm a Christian and that you're, well, not... Thank you for making my point so crystal clear. (and the following point does *not* make Christians (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | (...) I think you just dodged the question here-- unless you're insinuating that science should dictate our morals? IE that *because* we can eliminate STD's if we stick to having one partner, that it's morally good? But back to the point. Let's (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | (...) Let's face it -- that's exactly what this is, despite your denial. If diseases cannot succeed in one way, they will do so in another way. Or put another way: the diseases whose transmissal routes are frustrated will die; but the diseases whose (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) Just because you say it is don't make the buttercups shine. I know what I said and I stand by it. I am on *record* of supporting same sex marriages. I don't care if you want a harem--gov't should *not* legislate morality. I know loving and (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Not a moral reason not to... (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —James Brown
|
| | | | | | (...) ...except in a very esotaric sense that taking action to prevent harmful diseases is life-affirming. <GD&R> :) James (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I already said there are "no other stakeholders". If one of the participants has an STD, there are other stakeholders. Nice try though. (22 years ago, 15-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) Except those passed from mother to child, like HIV, right? And those with other transmision vectors right? And anyway, let's imagine that everyone on earth got an authoritative bill of health and a list of their transmissible infections was (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) During my teen years there would have been no greater incentive NOT to have sex than to have to watch my parents going at it. Dave! (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) Oh I so agree with you. Parents... sex... Ick!!! Dave K (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm not sure what degree of humor is intended by either of you, but I've heard that before and bet you're both wrong. If you had been raised seeing sexual expression of your parents love as a normal event, you would not be squicked by the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) I was indeed being facetious, but I can see the issue you're addressing. I note that you're already putting a spin on it that presupposes your view to be right and mine to be wrong; specifically, you are saying that your favorable emotional (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | (...) Actually, I didn't. I said that I "bet" that you would feel differently if things had been different. (...) That would be fine with me. But I think the "ickyness" that we feel when considering our parents having sex is based on having sex be (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Darn it Chris, I'm trying to pick a fight here. Rise to it, man! Rise to it! (...) That would indeed be a strange lab to perform. Dave! (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | (...) K, this one made me laugh out loud. That would be something to see (but probably still have a high 'Ick" factor). Again, something that others can do, but I probably would *ahem* abstain... Is like the new law in Ontario which states that (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Stephen Hurn
|
| | | | (...) This is why hypothetical situations fail, particularly when in relation to members of the opposite sex :). Thus far all that has been discussed is based upon a series of hypothetical people who all think that sex is something that is based (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: tolerant morals are a blueprint to disaster (but I don't force a change) —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | You have so completely oversimplified the possibilities in your analysis that a complete evaluation would be quite lengthy. (...) No one thinks this. At least not any more than every feeling-complex is purely physical because our brain contains our (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
