 | | Re: Family values? —Bill Farkas
|
| | | (...) But isn't this precisely the crux of the matter. This is why sex outside of marriage is morally wrong. Because it causes all manner of hurt and confusion on so many levels (as illustrated in the article). It is not considered wrong because (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Family values? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | (...) It isn't. (...) It needn't. (...) Well, I think that your main point here is that they should be prepared for the results. And I agree. But that doesn't mean that people have to get hurt. (...) Disagree. Most people, most of the time, are (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Family values? —James Simpson
|
| | | | | | (...) Why not? Bill gave reasons for why it is morally wrong - as a debate reader and sometime participant, I prefer well-reasoned rebuttals to "that's just the way it is" statements. Granted, something may fundamentally just Be, but tell me why. (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | (...) I can't speak for Chris, but I will point out that as a human invention (and in the form we're discussing, a Modern Western Invention at that), marriage does not determine the moral correctness of anything. That is, of course, unless morality (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —James Simpson
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Current "Western" ([American, Western European, Canadian, Australian) as a functional (as opposed to formal) culture and economic region]) society may have it's own particular flavor, it's own particular "style" of marriage, but I think that (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | (...) The fact that you suggest the self-evidence of marriage indicates that you and I have two fundamentally divergent worldviews. That's fine, of course, but we need to recognize that certain issues are therefore insoluble between us, and this may (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —James Simpson
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Granted, but i'd be suprised if anything is ever solved in debate. Personally, I prow around here because I enjoy a gentlemanly clash of arms and because I think that it's fundamentally important to speak up about certain things. For instance, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) to (...) faithfullness, (...) It sounds like you are saying that the crux of the moral status of marriage comes from: fidelity, duty, and commitment. How does fidelity work in a culture which accepts polygamous marriage as the norm? Is the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —James Simpson
|
| | | | | | | | (...) The crux of marriage is indeed fidelity, duty, and commitment...but fidelity, duty and commitment are not owed by the betrothed merely to oneanother, but also to the moral absolutes which have pressing claim on their conduct. If you do not (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Bill doesn't give supportable or reasonable reasons. He said it's wrong "Because it causes all manner of hurt and confusion on so many levels...[and] because innocent people get hurt." And the entirety of the rest of my note addressed exactly (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Family values? —Maggie Cambron
|
| | | | | (...) Actually Bill, I agree with you to a greater extent than you might imagine. Which is why I made the flippant (hence the "no, really", meaning, "seriously") statement in the first place. I agree wholeheartedly that "intimacy should be shared by (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) You're far too kind. It's just that I just get my jollies by trying to sound like I know what I'm talking about! Dave! But in any case, thank you for the nice compliment! (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Family values? —Steve Thomas
|
| | | | | (...) Bill, I agree with you that sex outside of marriage is immoral, but I want to make a distinction as to its primary wrongfulness. It is not - as I understand the problem - primarily wrong because of any contingent circumstances that may or may (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Steve Thomas
|
| | | | | | | "Steve Thomas" <steve_thomas_2000_n...tmail.com> wrote in message news:G6nK8M.5ny@lugnet.com... (...) for (...) daughter (...) I'll add that if the consequence and the initial action are teleologically related (as are sex and procreation), then the (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) I've been waiting to see the new thread. Did I need to respond to get it? If so, then shoot. (Bad choice of words given the other thread :-) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Steve Thomas
|
| | | | | | | "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G6t0JK.3Jw@lugnet.com... (...) or (...) Weeks (...) thread), (...) If (...) Chris, I just saw your note and will try to post something tomorrow. Take care, Steve (23 years ago, 8-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Steve Thomas
|
| | | | | | "Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G6t0JK.3Jw@lugnet.com... (...) or (...) Weeks (...) thread), (...) If (...) Chris, Before we begin, could I ask you to be a little more explicit as to your position as regards sexual (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Family values? —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | (...) Mostly. You may also have contractually obligated yourself to other limitations of behavior. If I agree with my wife that we won't sleep around, then violating that agreement is bad. Chris (23 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Family values? —Tom Stangl
|
| | | | Your case is not relevant - your mother and step-father obviously understood you were not "his". There was no fraud involved. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
