Subject:
|
Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Dec 2000 06:15:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
339 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi Steve,
That was interesting, and it certainly makes a change from Leviticus and the
crimes of Sodom :-). However, I don't think it tells me anything that makes
me more sympathetic to the Christian POV on sexual morality, or changes my
own views.
I don't even know whether it's possible for this discussion to change either
of our views. It seems to me that we start from such different basic
assumptions that whatever logic or reason we apply, we are bound to end up
with different conclusions. I might agree with all your rational arguments,
as arguments... except that since I don't share the starting point, I don't
agree with the conclusions.
Here's a question for you, on the more general subject of christian
morality:
Why does it change so much?
From one sect to another, and from one century to another, what moral and
what's not changes quite considerably. The obvious current division is
between Catholics who are not allowed to use certain birth control methods,
and other christians who are. Are they not both christian? Who is right?
Some Christian sects now bless homosexual unions. Are they reading different
books from the ones you quoted? Historically things change evn more
startlingly: I don't need to go into the parade of historic events approved
and even initiated by the christianity of the time which would now be seen
as horribly immoral. Thou shalt not kill... unless it's an Albigensian
heretic, a greek Orthodox christian (if you're a frustrated crusader with
time to kill in Constantinople), a Protestant (if you're an English catholic
under Mary I), a Catholic (if you're an English protestant under Elizabeth I
a few years later), a German (if you're a Brit in WW1 or II), an englishman
(if you're a German in WWI or II), a native american (if you're an American
pioneer in the 19th c)..... ect etc etc.
Is it likley to change more? (yes :-) ). What will it change to?
> Again, I realize that we may have profound disagreements on this subject,
> and I don't present what I have as a personal attack of any kind; rather, • my
> hope is that we can understand one another better and encourage informed
> dialogue
Nope, not taking any of it as a personal attack. The stuff you quoted did
make me feel *indignant* when I read it, but not at you personally. That's
why I waited before replying. I haven't seen the kind of arguments you
quoted anywhere else, so I'm still interested.
And anyone who feels fed up with religious discussions can just skip this
thread. (yes, I'm talking to you in the back row there!)
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| Kevin, (...) Well, you know more about my basic assumptions, I think, than I do about yours. If you care to take a moment to state the differences, as you understand them, perhaps we could build a bridge or two. Also, I think it's rare that any one (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| (...) Kevin, I ask only because if you have disagreements that constitute such a "wide [moral] gulf," and are willing to lay down statements such as "there's no non-religious reason [by this I take you to mean 'rational']...," perhaps it would be (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
