tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post2587911175635078023..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Homosexuality and the Choice ArgumentAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-28191301515363827202013-05-24T08:54:23.381-06:002013-05-24T08:54:23.381-06:00I fully agree. I think that homosexual desire and ...I fully agree. I think that homosexual desire and action is not immoral but having sex is a moral choice for human beings, every time with anyone whom they choose to engage in sex. The "it's not a choice" argument is damaging to everyone. If I had a child, heterosexual or homosexual I would want them to understand that having sex is a moral choice. I would encourage them not to have sex because they are to young. I think the "choice" argument puts children in danger, especially homosexual children. They must learn that having sex is a moral choice no matter who or what they are attracted to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-7024608424381756862012-11-21T04:35:27.139-07:002012-11-21T04:35:27.139-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Chanaka Palliyaguruhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03887951781861113397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-58606324644063942462012-06-11T11:59:15.533-06:002012-06-11T11:59:15.533-06:00You should have read the post and not just the com...You should have read the post and not just the comments.<br /><br />The post concerns the fact that genetics does not matter. If being black was a choice (if some sort of milkshake could make a person white), it would still be immoral to discriminate against those who chose to be black. Failure to do so would be to inflict harms on others for no good reason. Indeed, the only reason we have for inflicting harms on homosexuals is because some pre-historic bigots thought homosexuality was icky and they gave the same opinion to the god they invented.<br /><br />Genetics does not matter. Causing harm for no good reason is what matters.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-29824165367177856202012-06-10T14:07:38.494-06:002012-06-10T14:07:38.494-06:00Sad to read some of the comments. If one does mini...Sad to read some of the comments. If one does minimal research they can identify that there is no scientific studies that are conclusive to show that Homosexuality is genetic. There are some poor correlations. If someone is black can they become white? There are many, many homosexuals that decide not to be homosexuals... This goes against the political homosexual agenda so it gets buried. It is a shame that the country has been debased so much by the homosexual agenda. It will change though when more and more people get tired of the politics and really look at science. That will be a great day for the USA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1006463847223584882011-11-09T08:30:58.210-07:002011-11-09T08:30:58.210-07:00I've never heard someone say that pedophilia i...I've never heard someone say that pedophilia is wrong because it's a choice that someone makes. That it's clearly acceptable to punish child molesters because it's a conscious decision. No one has to rationalize to that point when figuring out how acceptable it is to punish pedophile behavior. By and large, people acknowledge that acting on pedophile desires is wrong because it harms children.<br /><br />People absolutely argue that it's acceptable to punish homosexuality because it's a conscious choice. When people run out of nonsense arguments for why homosexuality is harmful, they rationalize their bigotry by insisting that it's a choice, and thus that people could just stop being gay. THAT is the obvious and valuable place of pointing out to the heterosexual bigot that they did not choose to be straight.Flimsymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10671605528758099945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-32513915230620750322011-11-07T16:58:32.037-07:002011-11-07T16:58:32.037-07:00nice post.
History is full of instances where se...nice post. <br /><br />History is full of instances where sexual prefrences differ from culture to culture. other poeple assure me that it has been proven by scientists to be genetic. I haven't looked at the study but if we assume It's well made then we can say that sexuality is defined both by culture and genetic disposition. <br /><br />and while the causes of sexual orientation is interesting they are irrelevant to whether or not we should support the lbgt community. We have every reason to support humans entering into eqalitarian relationships that fullfill their desires and the desires of others. <br /><br />it would seem to me that if we wanted to make a society that efficiently fullfilled desires we would encourage bi-sexuality without condemning single gender relationships. I am not bi-sexual but i can see that it doubles the available partners and thus the chance that one who could find a compatible relationship. and if soceity had bestowed upon me and my peers this disposition (in so far as it was able) it would lead to greater desire fullfillment oppurtunity within society.<br /><br />this holds for group marriage as well. if people weren't taking themselves off the market after marriage it would be easier for pepople to find life partners and meaningful relationships simply becuase there would be more opputunities. <br /><br />i am not saying that single gender single marriage partner relationships should not be condemned. but that egalitarian bi-sexual group marriages should be praised (not traidiotnal mysogonistic ploygamy). since, as a system, it would lead to the most desire fullfillment. it seems to me the person with perfect desires would be both bi-sexual and open to a group marriage between consenting adults in an equal relationship. <br /><br />p.s. @ mat, if you read the sentences after that quote you would have learned that he was not equating the activities, he was comparing the arguments. He was showing that the argument which we use to support something good (gay rights) could also be used to support something bad (pedophilia (or anything for that matter)). <br /><br />furthermore the act of comparing good and bad activites is not idiotic even if it had been done. one needs to compare things in order to better understand those things and the differences between them.Kristopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08544209777124068097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-69648388070379453182011-11-06T03:43:11.221-07:002011-11-06T03:43:11.221-07:00Being straight as a choice is not a flawed respons...Being straight as a choice is not a flawed response to the claim that being gay is a choice.<br /><br />Your comeback to this is whether being attracted to children is a choice. That does not make the first response flawed. It just means that the response to THIS comeback is, that whether it is a choice is irrelevant.<br /><br />That there is a comeback doesn't mean that the response is flawed, it just means that there is a response to the comeback.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12882701036549189439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-15442594269832289072011-11-04T22:02:07.739-06:002011-11-04T22:02:07.739-06:00Well said, Alonzo. Serendipitously, I was just te...Well said, Alonzo. Serendipitously, I was just telling some people this same thing a few days ago. I would like to add one thing, though:<br /><br />While "homosexuality is not a choice" is not an argument in defense of homosexual actions, it is an argument in defense of homosexual desires. A lot of moral condemnation is aimed at the homosexual desires themselves, as if those desires could be changed. Studies have shown this is false. Homosexual desires are biological, not something that a person chooses (and not something that can change due to social pressure).kipkoanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06965641339336813677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-91843727159661189652011-11-04T20:11:32.753-06:002011-11-04T20:11:32.753-06:00@Anonymous: Alonzo's moral system is called de...@Anonymous: Alonzo's moral system is called desirism, and there's links about it on the sidebar.<br /><br />Thanks, Alonzo, for posting this. I've often used the argument that you show here to be unsound. Needless to say, I won't anymore. :)Joshua Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08556300019968902190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-16538607731354757672011-11-04T11:44:51.297-06:002011-11-04T11:44:51.297-06:00So where do you get your definitions of morals?So where do you get your definitions of morals?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com