14 Jan 12
And because I believe that everything should be permitted unless conclusively proven to be sufficiently harmful that outlawing is a proportionate response.
In ther words, your opening question is the wrong question. From my perspective, you have to demonstrate why homosexuality should be prohibited. I don't have to justify why it should be permitted. And this cannot be done by reference to the Bible, or any other book, as it begs the question I raise above.
I think many things are immoral (adultery for example). But I would not make them illegal, as I do not think this proportionate.
14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFyour sense of drama is bordering on a kind of heightened awareness, dare i light a
My "foibles" were my moral takes on adultery, homosexuality and bestiality, I take it. And the "spanner in the works" was the fact that I disagreed with you. As for the "pander" thing, onlookers would be forgiven for thinking that you have been in 'self-pander' mode from page 1, and that, indeed is exactly why it has been "a quite remarkable thread", as Proper Knob put it, and now the cables are buzzing and the smoke is rising.
match and you perceive a flame-thrower.?
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt was punishable by death, robbie. Arbitrary, discriminatory, backward, prejudiced, anachronistic, barbaric, and punishable by death. Not "reasonable" then. Not "reasonable" now. The darkness has lifted and there you are - clinging on it - trying desperately to keep it in place.
yes, i think it was a reasonable request.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis is not a retort that addresses the content of my post, robbie, so it's a dud. It is you who introduced the words "foibles" and "spanner in the works", not me.
your sense of drama is bordering on a kind of heightened awareness, dare i light a
match and you perceive a flame-thrower.?
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieTelling someone that they will be put to death for carrying out a practice is not 'asking them'.
yes, i think it was a reasonable request. citing that the punishment was severe is a real
no goer FMF, the punishment for bestiality and adultery was also severe yet you have
no problem stating that it was reasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist from
them.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI am not asking you to justify why it should be permitted, i am asking you to state
And because I believe that everything should be permitted unless conclusively proven to be sufficiently harmful that outlawing is a proportionate response.
In ther words, your opening question is the wrong question. From my perspective, you have to demonstrate why homosexuality should be prohibited. I don't have to justify why it should be permitt ...[text shortened]... dultery for example). But I would not make them illegal, as I do not think this proportionate.
why it is reasonable or unreasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist and so
far you have asserted that,
1.there is no other morality which states that it shouldn't be permitted therefore it must
be ok, again, this is not answering the question, its simply my morality verses your
morality
2. it cannot be demonstrated that the practice was harmful, well actually it can, but i
dont want to go into that here, it leads to all sorts of nasty cans of worms being opened.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour airline comparison is not valid. there is a justification for this rule that it valid.
Firstly you adhere to laws all the time, objecting to them on the basis that they are
coercive is a nonsense, for example when you take a flight in an aeroplane, do you
jump up into the isle and demand of the stewardess, oh by the way, i dont like being
coerced to remain in my seat during departure and take off, I feel i am being
coerced, is ...[text shortened]... me.
I am not demanding that you do anything other than consider the question that I
asked.
As I said, you have to come up with an equally valid reason for outlawing homosexuality. I do not have to justify why it should be legal.
14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderthere is also a justification for asking a person to refrain from adultery, it breaks up
Your airline comparison is not valid. there is a justification for this rule that it valid.
As I said, you have to come up with an equally valid reason for outlawing homosexuality. I do not have to justify why it should be legal.
families, or homosexuality, its unnatural, therefore Gods requirements are reasonable
on this basis.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat God and the Israelites did not approve of adultery and bestiality is not relevant to my approach to adultery and bestiality. You are fibbing when you say I stated "that it was reasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist from them". I said no such thing - as you well know - because I simply do not believe that God asked the Israelites to do anything, or told them, or ordered them, or communicated with them at all. This lying about what I said is not a welcome addition to your "staggering around holding your head", robbie.
yes, i think it was a reasonable request. citing that the punishment was severe is a real
no goer FMF, the punishment for bestiality and adultery was also severe yet you have
no problem stating that it was reasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist from
them.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour op did not mention the Israelites.
I am not asking you to justify why it should be permitted, i am asking you to state
why it is reasonable or unreasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist and so
far you have asserted that,
1.there is no other morality which states that it shouldn't be permitted therefore it must
be ok, again, this is not answering the question, its ...[text shortened]... i
dont want to go into that here, it leads to all sorts of nasty cans of worms being opened.
But if your questions is whether it is unreasonable for a God to ask his followers to desist from homosexuality, my answer is still yes until God explains why he thinks it is necessary to prohibit this.
Have you a view other than it is what is said in the Bible?
14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFperhaps it was simple misunderstanding, i cannot say, but if this is the best you have
That God and the Israelites did not approve of adultery and bestiality is not relevant to my approach to adultery and bestiality. You are fibbing when you say I stated "that it was reasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist from them". I said no such thing - as you well know - because I simply do not believe that God asked the Israelites to do anything, ...[text shortened]... what I said is not a welcome addition to your "staggering around holding your head", robbie.
got, so be it, i retract the statement.
14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderthe Mosiac law was specific to the Israelites, my mistake was assuming that this was
Your op did not mention the Israelites.
But if your questions is whether it is unreasonable for a God to ask his followers to desist from homosexuality, my answer is still yes until God explains why he thinks it is necessary to prohibit this.
Have you a view other than it is what is said in the Bible?
understood. The bible explains that the practice is unnatural, yes i have opinions but i
want to discuss it from a Biblical perspective.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYep, let's put people to death for reasons that we would rather not go into.
I am not asking you to justify why it should be permitted, i am asking you to state
why it is reasonable or unreasonable for God to ask the Israelites to desist and so
far you have asserted that,
1.there is no other morality which states that it shouldn't be permitted therefore it must
be ok, again, this is not answering the question, its ...[text shortened]... i
dont want to go into that here, it leads to all sorts of nasty cans of worms being opened.
Much better to just get on with it.