To answer the question, gay sex is immoral because the mere thought of male/male coupling gives me a raging hard on, and I'm afraid to find out why. Does anyone know of a good endocronologist? Preferably male,,,tall, muscular, with long hair,,,,
It's immoral because it is. Look up what morality means.
Oh, heck. I'll get you started.
If someone says homosexuality is immoral because they get their morals from an old book, and that's what the book says, then they're right. Within the context of their moral system, of course. That doesn't mean there's anything unethical going on with homosexuality, under your moral system.
Ethics are philosophical consequences derived from value-based premises. They can be rooted in religious premises, but they can also be rooted in other premises. The value systems that ethics stem from matter a great deal in determining if common moral understanding can be reached. But those premises can be arbitrarily arbitrary, and vary from culture to culture and from person to person.
It's a little reductionist to say that all morality boils down to opinion, but it's essentially correct. And opinions are like assholes.
If you seek to debate morality of homosexuality, you need to stake out some rules of engagement. I'd recommend picking a secular (common-ground) ethical framework to circumscribe your debate. Otherwise, everyone is right, and everyone else is wrong.
As far as comments made above about animals being homosexual, they also eat their own excrement. Should humans do that too?
If it were necessary for human babies to eat their mothers excrement in order to introduce bacteria essential for survival into their own digestive system as it is for elephants, then yes. If it were necessary for humans to digest food twice to extract the nutrition like it is for many herbivores, then yes.
However, your comments are simply a Straw Man argument. No one has claimed that an action is moral simply because other species in nature do it. The argument that the religious often make is that homosexuality is immoral because it is unnatural. Showing that homosexuality is common in nature disproves the false argument presented by the religious.
Once again, what few arguments for claiming that homosexual acts are immoral have been easily disproved by ample counter examples. I'm not even being intellectually challenged here. Through me some argument that at least requires a micron of thought to discredit.
If something bad happens to someone in my religion, that is god testing their faith.
If something happens to one of my enemies, that is god punishing them for their sins.
If I don't like something, then it is immoral and should be banned. Otherwise, someone might do it in front of the children and then my children will be doing it. Think of the children. It must be immoral in order to save the children.
In other news of circular logic: gay sex is immoral. Therefore, if we allow gay sex, we will then allow bestiality. Therefore, it is a slippery slope, and gay sex is immoral.
Gay people have a square penis.
Dan is smarter than most of the adversaries that he hooked into this debate. Bap seems to be smart enough to generally agree to disagree and avoid the debate.
Prostate exams are or maybe should be immoral.
Some people still think that homosexuality is a psychological disease.
Does that pretty much sum it up or did I miss something?
Perhaps, but I prefer to hold people accountable for their actions in the here and now.
The bottom line is that gay sex/gay relations has absolutely zero impact on the person not participating. There is simply not a single valid compelling reason to deny a whole class of people their civil rights. So in the end, what you think of me and what you think of gay sex is none of my business.
Back to the here and now, I would like to leave you with this;
Before you speak to me about your religion, first show it to me in how you treat other people
Before you tell me how much you love your God, show me in how much you love all His children.
Before you preach to me of your passion for your faith, teach me about it through your compassion for your neighbors.
In the end, I’m not as interested in what you have to tell or sell as in how you choose to live and give.
After numerous attempts to move the conversation from male gay sex to female gay sex, I can help but wonder what baps fascination is with male gay sex. Let's focus on female gay sex,,,id like to hear what the bloody hell is wrong with two hot, naked, sweaty and ready, dripping wet females getting it on with eachother in the privacy of my bedroom?
Bap69, your unhealthy obsession with this topic has made you into a troll. Find a willing man and get what you need. Remember to put some lube in first, and make sure he wears a condom. After the initial pain goes away, you'll feel better.
This thread just goes on and on and on... Why oh why do we care so much about what goes on in the bedrooms of others?
There will always be very closed minded people who take comfort in believing that everything there is to know about the world can be found in a book written thousands of years ago. Many of these people (who supposedly support small government) want government that can compel people to the teachings of that book. I'm forever amazed that intelligent people will turn to the bible itself as proof that the teachings contained therein are the only possible truth. The bible is true because the bible says it's true. Really? Good thing people are superstitious enough not to subject these arguments to any kind of peer review.
As a card carrying republican, I detest what this mindset has done to my party. These absurd moral arguments are exactly why the democrats keep winning. All they have to say are the words "abortion" and "gays" and we just run off to chase the shiny object. So, while we're chasing the shiny object, we make a$$es of ourselves telling people that babies resulting from rape are God's will, sex can only be between a man and a woman, etc.... we have no one to blame but ourselves when we go the way of the Torries. The republicans will never make any gains until they divorce themselves from the religious right. When everything you earn above subsistence levels are taxed out of existance (see WWII period) then perhaps we'll realize that we're losing more than we're gaining from our religious-right mouthpieces -- who are nothing more than a bunch of narrow-minded, superstitious rubes.
We are placing bets, I've made my choice/placed my bet, you've done the same.
I wouldn't call it a bet, it's more of a spiritual journey. I am closest to a mix of Gaianism (babylonian mother earth) which views the earth (and thus the universe) as one organism that you protect and cherish because you are a part of it, some shaman influences from Ruiz, some buddhism as well as Indian tantra/yogi spiritualism and some of my christian roots and it makes a good compendium.
Nazi Germany also put "Free Thinker" societies -- athiests -- to the wall too.
Yes, pre-Nazi Germany had the largest atheist/humanist organizations in the world at the time. One of the first things that Hitler did was seize the assets and dissolve these groups.
"For eight months we have been waging a heroic battle against the Communist threat to our Volk, the decomposition of our culture, the subversion of our art, and the poisoning of our public morality. We have put an end to denial of God and abuse of religion. We owe Providence humble gratitude for not allowing us to lose our battle against the misery of unemployment and for the salvation of the German peasant."
* * * * *
"We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."
-- Hitler, 1933
One has to thoroughly have their head in the sand to think that the Nazi movement was atheist.
The most unnatural act by far is organized religion. No other species pays a subset of its members to hold forth about invisible beings and their purported will. The damage can be observed in Bop69, who is trapped in a cycle of abuse that was inflicted upon him and that he inflicts now upon himself and others.
What of the six hours of television that americans watch per day? Of the 250+ pounds of sugar that americans consume annually? Neither act is natural, they are both deleterious to society, so why doth thou not protest these immoral and unnatural acts? Why such focus on male/male coupling (while oddly ignoring female homosexual sex)?
The only reasoning I can figure, is because your thoughts are not organic. They were planted in your mind by outside forces looking to control you. To dumb you down thru malnutrition and poor health (mentally/physically/spiritually) that arise from all the sugar consumption, and fortified by the mind control you willingly subject yourself to, six hours a day, wastijg away staring mindlessly at the boob tube
It's just plain dirty, but my gay neighbor sure does know how to make me feel like I'm really something else, my ass is great, face, skin, legs, heck I'm just plain beautiful, take great care of myself, and look ten years younger than my age. Pretty crazy feminist world we live in when a man is getting more compliments and looks from the men than the women. Women, they don't seem to care what you look like as long as you got the money. Times they are a changing.
You do realize your question has an internal contradiction, correct? If anyone answers why sodomy is immoral, you will simply harangue them for making a relative values judgment.
Skipping morality, let's restate this thread as "can anyone tell me why sodomitic conduct is intrinsically defective?"
Why yes... yes I can. The purpose of your mouth is generally to take in food and liquids, and breath. Oh, and talk. It is true that people derive sexual excitement from kissing or oral "sex" but kissing is generally part of sexual foreplay towards completing the coital act, and oral "sex" isn't sex. It's masturbation of another with your mouth. You could use your hand to the same effect, which I believe is called a "handjob."
The purpose of a man's rectum is to hold shat until you are ready to excrete it. Its purpose isn't to receive an erect penis until the penis ejaculates. That isn't its purpose... it's reason for existing. It is designed to be the end of your digestive tract, not a receptacle for semen.
Lastly, the purpose of a penis is to engorge with blood and be stimulated until it ejaculates semen. It's other purpose is to empty the bladder.
Semen has a single purpose: it is the portable mechanism to move 23 chromosomes to the egg of a female, who has a complementary ovary that releases an egg holding a complementary set of 23 chromosomes, and the cycle repeats roughly every 28 days or so.
This is why nothing related to same sex attraction is either sex, or love. It's masturbation, in concert, typically by a dominant male abusing the rectum of a passive male until the dominant male ejaculates. This is typically accompanied by a "blowjob" or "handjob" to complete the ejaculation of totally wasted semen of the passive male. Love has a purpose. As John Mayer says, so it has to be true, love is a verb. The nature end of love is attraction, and attraction brings about coitus, normally. That, ignoring modern pharmacology, usually begets children, furthering the race.
Pointing out irrelevant straw man arguments like other species is only a distraction. Homosexuality is a biological dead end, and directly contradicts the fundamental purpose of any species' body.
For women, it is largely the same. Two women waste their eggs in menstruation each month because all they do is orally or physically stimulate one another's clitori until they ejaculate. That isn't sex. It's masturbation. If you can do it alone, it isn't sex. Only a man and a woman can copulate as designed, and "mate" possibly furthering the race by having children.
Whether you care about this fact, or want to go off on some overpopulation diversion, is irrelevant.
Everything about a man, penis and testicles, and a woman, clitoris, vagina, uterus, and ovaries, are "made" for one another. They have a well functioning design and purpose. You can argue with... whoever, about the design of things - God, mother nature, the universe - if you want. I had nothing to do with it.
Perfect (male) and imperfect (female) sodomy is "immoral" for traditional religion as much as anything because it runs directly counter to the "natural law" and the basic biological function of a human male. It isn't normal, nor a variation of normal. It simply is what it is -- a deviant perversion of a basic human behavior.
You don't need to respond to me. This is basic science and anatomy. There doesn't need to be subjective values judgments or empty emotional appeals to "love." If you have a problem with my arguments, curse mother nature and shout at the dirt.