Search results

It seems to me that the approach you've taken is similar to what I've seen called pluralistic moral reductionism. I think it's a good way to approach conversations about morality when aren't sharing worldviews and probably are talking past each other.

So ought we do it because it a mercy, or ought we not do it because it is a sin?

I used to work as a transporter in the physical therapy department of a long-term care facility, and I ran into issues like this a lot. I was religious at the time, rather black-and-white in my thinking, and this was something that bothered me. I never felt right lying to the patients with...

They're litterally here asking to learn about God, Christianity, etc., already. You could try giving your own answers to those questions instead of scolding them. Here's a tip: don't expect piety from nonbelievers. Of it upsets you so much that it derails the conversation for you, maybe these...

Based on...?

Okay, I understand that when I said “whatever my motives happen to be,” I made it sound like a whim-of-the-moment kind of thing, but I was just being vague for the sake of the brevity. Those motives could easily include things like my desire to remain obedient to an external authority. And my...

Who is the "they" in this sentence? Non-human animals, the fruit flies and such? They're called homosexual using either of the two definitions I gave in #44.

Because when faced with more than one option I cognitively evaluate and make a selection based on whatever my motives happen to be. The fact that this doesn't happen in some mysterious way is separate from causality doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. I could raise the same argument against...

As you've pointed out, animals have reproductive organs but not "private parts" since they're non-potable beings, so your definition of "gay" can't apply to animals. I'd call that nuance.

If the word "gay" means "being sexually attracted to the same sex" or "has engaged/does engage in the act of having sexual relations with members of the same sex" (which are both far more common than your unique and nuanced definition), then yes, non-human animals can be gay.

You've identified a deficiency in your chosen definition of the word 'gay.' The more commonly used definitions do not raise this particular issue.

I do know homosexual who have had good come from it in their lives. You know, little things, like love. But pretty much every homosexual person I know has had bad things come into their lives because of their homosexuality, and just about all of it is a result of someone else mistreaing them for...

Not exactly. The changes happen regardless of their environment. Changes that happen to be beneficial given the environment often happen to be passed along, but the change isn't triggered by the environment. And it's not the case that changes that aren't helpful are likely to cause death...

I think perhaps you are concerned I may be an advocate for scientism; rest assured I am not. I agree that we need more than science when we deal with metaphysics (also, I’m not an atheist who shies away from that word, or who imagines that they don’t hold any metaphysical views whatsoever)...

I do not see the alleged contradiction here. Can you elaborate? Do you have an example of this being selective in what it chooses aside from abortion? Abortion is kind of a tricky topic, first and foremost because it involves what I think most people think are two moral considerations - the...

I wasn't referring to Paul's conversion or the resurrection. I was saying that bit in Romans 1, his belief that the existence of God can be seen "from what has been made," is reasonable given the model of the world that he was working from. But we're working from better models now, and I don't...

And I believe Christianity is false (even if theism isn't, but I also think that is), so that doesn't do me much good. If you don't mind me butting in answering something directed at someone else, it matters because I don't know if I'll die tomorrow or live another 80. It matters for the kind...

From a cosmic perspective, perhaps, but so what? As long as we exist, my existence matters to other humans and other humans' existence matters to me. This is enough. Yes, significance is relative to context. Our context is the here and now and the life of our species, and this, again, seems...

In before "of course they do, they just deny it."

Never? Atheist philosophers and counter apologists give precising definitions of God in thelir work all the time. I do it in conversations with people who want to know why I'm an atheist. God's existence is not plain to me, nor am I suppressing the truth. I understand why Paul would think the...