14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyes, and don't forget the penalty for not adhering. it's part of the package.
so your objection is that it limits sexual freedom within the bounds of marraige and
limits it to between a man and a women. Is it unreasonable to ask persons to refrain
from pre marital sex and to remain faithful to their partner after marraige, if so, why.
it's unreasonable to ask persons to refrain from pre marital sex. i already gave you a couple of reasons:
1> it's none of your business what sexual arrangement someone want's to make as long as it's not predatory.
2> forcing people to adhere to one specif sexual formula is sexual coercion; such coercion is an attempt to control a person's sexuality. a person's sexually cannot be legally mandated. it is immoral to do so.
you are clearly sidestepping the discussion of these reasons. so i will ask you.
1. why do you feel it is your business how other people conduct their sexuality?
2. do you believe you have the right to control/legally mandate another person's sexuality?
14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou have been asked a question which relates directly to your ragged and evasive follow ups to your OP. What does what you claim 'what God forbids', with regard to homosexuality, have to do with people who do not subscribe to your belief system? If you just continue to dodge this then surely it is you who is being "unreasonable"?
I am not dodging anything, i have asked you for your opinion, you have stated that
you have given it, what more is there to say.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by VoidSpirit1. you assertion that its none of anyone's business is refuted, adultery affects more
yes, and don't forget the penalty for not adhering. it's part of the package.
it's unreasonable to ask persons to refrain from pre marital sex. i already gave you a couple of reasons:
1> it's none of your business what sexual arrangement someone want's to make as long as it's not predatory.
2> forcing people to adhere to one specif sexual formula ...[text shortened]... 2. do believe you have the right to control/legally mandate another person's sexuality?
than one person, whole families, and secondly is not a reason at all, to state that its
no one else's business is merely an opinion, not a reason.
2.stating that a person sexual activity can or cannot be mandated again is not a
reason, its simply an opinion. You were asked to comment on marital fidelity, you
have not stated why its unreasonable to expect a person to remain faithful to their
marraige partner, simply stating that such a request cannot be mandated, is not a
reason at all, again , its merely an opinion, unsubstantiated at a that.
1, its not my business at all, i did not author the mosaic law,(is this really the best
you can do, if so, i dont hold out much hope for a fruitful discussion)
2, i have not controlled or mandated anything, I did not author the mosaic law nor
its ordinances.
I merely think that its not unreasonable to ask persons to remain faithful to their
marraige partners, to desist from pre marital sex, homosexuality and bestiality.
14 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFfirst of all, its not a claim, i can show you the ordinances, secondly its not about my
You have been asked a question which relates directly to your ragged and evasive follow ups to your OP. What does what you claim 'what God forbids', with regard to homosexuality, have to do with people who do not subscribe to your belief system? If you just continue to dodge this then surely it is you who is being "unreasonable"?
belief system, its about whether its a reasonable request on Gods part to ask persons
under the Mosaic law to refrain from certain practices and lastly its not about me FMF,
please stop trying to make it personal.
14 Jan 12
As i suspected, those purveyors of the New morality dont not know why its reasonable
or otherwise for God to ask persons under the Mosiac law to refrain from certain
practices, all that has been proffered is mere opinion and unsubstantiated at that,
thankyou my friends, you were most helpful!
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell you claim that Mosaic Law constitutes 'God's instructions'; I don't think it does. So you showing me "the ordinances" is moot. That Mosaic Law constitutes 'God's instructions' certainly is your "belief system". So, you ask, of people who do not accept that 'God has made requests', "whether its a reasonable request on Gods part to ask persons under the Mosaic law to refrain from certain practices" and when someone responds with "yes, it is unreasonable" [because the things that are allegedly 'forbidden' each have a different 'moral' framing], you declare his answers to be "irrelevant" and dodge any genuine discussion.
first of all, its not a claim, i can show you the ordinances, secondly its not about my
belief system, its about whether its a reasonable request on Gods part to ask persons
under the Mosaic law to refrain from certain practices...
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieobviously you have selective reading since the explanations i give fly right through you, so yes, it is not possible to have a fruitful discussion with you.
[b]1. you assertion that its none of anyone's business is refuted, adultery affects more
than one person, whole families, and secondly is not a reason at all, to state that its
no one else's business is merely an opinion, not a reason.
2.stating that a person sexual activity can or cannot be mandated again is not a
reason, its simply an opinion ...[text shortened]... t be mandated, is not a
reason at all, again , its merely an opinion, unsubstantiated at a that.
the reasons i give are opinions. the laws you listed are opinions as well. i gave you my opinion of why i think the opinions of moses are unreasonable and barbaric.
but at last, i got some answers from you.
1, its not my business at all, i did not author the mosaic law,(is this really the best
you can do, if so, i dont hold out much hope for a fruitful discussion)
1. that's great. so why are you so concerned about other people's sexuality?
2, i have not controlled or mandated anything, I did not author the mosaic law nor
its ordinances.
I merely think that its not unreasonable to ask persons to remain faithful to their
marraige partners, to desist from pre marital sex, homosexuality and bestiality.
so in your opinion, legal mandates to control other people's sexuality are moral. that's quiet barbaric. thanks for sharing.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell I have for one have offered you an answer on why it is "unreasonable" but you have refused to discuss it. So its' not entirely clear why you appear to be declaring yourself the 'winner'.
As i suspected, those purveyors of the New morality dont not know why its reasonable
or otherwise for God to ask persons under the Mosiac law to refrain from certain
practices, all that has been proffered is mere opinion and unsubstantiated at that,
thankyou my friends, you were most helpful!
14 Jan 12
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFOk, i see you are having some trouble with these questions, within the parameters that
Well you claim that Mosaic Law constitutes 'God's instructions'; I don't think it does. So you showing me "the ordinances" is moot. That Mosaic Law constitutes 'God's instructions' certainly is your "belief system". So, you ask, of people who do not accept that 'God has made requests', "whether its a reasonable request on Gods part to ask persons under the Mosa declare his answers to be "irrelevant" and dodge any genuine discussion.
i set out, lets take it out of there for a moment,
why is asking a person to remain faithful to their marraige partner unreasonable, FMF.
Why is asking a person to desist from homosexuality unreasonable FMF?
Why is asking a person to desist from bestiality unreasonable, FMF.
Is that easier?
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour opinion is that it's not unreasonable to ask persons to desist from homosexuality? Why is this your opinion?
I merely think that its not unreasonable to ask persons to remain faithful to their
marraige partners, to desist from pre marital sex, homosexuality and bestiality.
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieah, a qualifier. "those under mosaic law."
As i suspected, those purveyors of the New morality dont not know why its reasonable
or otherwise for God to ask persons under the Mosiac law to refrain from certain
practices, all that has been proffered is mere opinion and unsubstantiated at that,
thankyou my friends, you were most helpful!
so your question is no longer for atheists, its for those who are under mosaic law.
anybody here who is under mosaic law and willing to answer our friend here? anyone?
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI just saw this thread and decided to answer this particular statement of the question, for all three practices.
it simply, from a biblical stand point, transgresses sexual morality, as do adultery and
bestiality, however, why is it unreasonable for God to ask a person to refrain from the
practice, this is the question.
It is not unreasonable for someone to ask me to refrain from something.
It is also reasonable for me to take the request under consideration. (Of course, it is possible that I don't want to do those things anyway.) It is also reasonable for the person to expect me to want to know the reasons for the request, and the person can reasonably be expected to be ready to give me the reasons, and let me know of any consequences they foresee, of my decision.
How's that?
14 Jan 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritmore mere unsubstantiated opinion masquerading as something else. its barbaric, why,
obviously you have selective reading since the explanations i give fly right through you, so yes, it is not possible to have a fruitful discussion with you.
the reasons i give are opinions. the laws you listed are opinions as well. i gave you my opinion of why i think the opinions of moses are unreasonable and barbaric.
but at last, i got some a ...[text shortened]... to control other people's sexuality are moral. that's quiet barbaric. thanks for sharing.
because you state that its barbaric, no valid reason. You cannot state why its
unreasonable to ask a person to remain faithful to their marraige partner, its barbaric,
why, because you say it is, no valid reason, a huge pile of unsubstantiated mere
opinion. Its unreasonable to limit sexual relations to a man and women, why, because
you say it is, no valid reason, thank you for proving my point, i could not have done it
without you, you may return to proffering opinions from you room full of mirrors!