Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
As usual, you have it all backwards here. If you've been doing any reading on this forum at all, you'd notice that it's actually the atheists who like to hide behind the business structure to say, "You are running a business that serves the public and so you have to follow the law that says you no longer have any say in how you conduct yourself".
Of course it has a basis, it´s just not the basis you´d like it to have.Its usually subjective and then a consensus is agreed upon after it can be shown to be right according to the majority. But it doesn't really have a basis to start with.
Yes marriage is an amazing thing that needs defense!
One thing I notice about ethical conversations with Christians is they can give me a non religious explanation for Christian ethics - except when it comes to Gay Marriage, in which case their opposition seems to rest entirely on a handful of bible verses.
Can anyone provide a reason for opposing gay marriage - without invoking scripture or theology?
Compare what you ask here to what I said. Then remove the parts you have added, and ask a question that fits my statement.quatona
So what is that great basis that we should judge things by.
If I were married, I wouldn´t know who could possibly alter the meaning of my marriage, except for me and/or my wife. So I guess I would be quite relaxed in that respect.Marriage needs defense from being used as a means to pride and from alteration of meaning.
You'velost me. This is what I said about secular societies views on what is right. I was speaking about the laws, legislation and regulations of society and how they dont always take religious morals into consideration. I then said that human rights are the same and there is no clear foundation they have used and its based on subjective views. You then said of course they have a basis. I asked a simple question, "what is that basis according to you."Compare what you ask here to what I said. Then remove the parts you have added, and ask a question that fits my statement.
You are not my wife, after all.
Thanks.
Yes, fair summary.Youve lost me. This is what I said about secular societies views on what is right. I was speaking about the laws, legislation and regulations of society and how they dont always take religious morals into consideration. I then said that human rights are the same and there is no clear foundation they have used and its based on subjective views. You then said of course they have a basis.
No, you didn´t. You asked:I asked a simple question, "what is that basis according to you."
You added three things:So what is that great basis that we should judge things by.
Sure I have a reply once the question asked asks to support what I said (instead of adding a lot of stuff).You have refuted what I said. I thought when you said that you had a reply. Why say it has got one and then not say what it is. Its quite a simple request.
From what I'm understanding Its more about just what you think period. What you have just said maybe seen differently to the next person. Well the way in which we should do it will be different. All what you said are good decent things that many people want. I believe we do know what we need to do. But there's two sides to it. Its one thing to come to some sort of agreement if that can be done and know that its the best thing to do. Its another to actually do it.Bottom line: It all depends on what you think is the purpose of morality
Except that neither you nor I can bypass our thinking - so let´s not pretend that it could possibly be about something else. I am not all-knowing, and you are not God´s brain or mouth piece.quatona
From what I'm understanding Its more about just what you think period.
Welcome to reality. That´s, however, a problem we are facing no matter what we consider the basis of our morality.What you have just said maybe seen differently to the next person. Well the way in which we should do it will be different. All what you said are good decent things that many people want. I believe we do know what we need to do. But there's two sides to it. Its one thing to come to some sort of agreement if that can be done and know that its the best thing to do. Its another to actually do it.
Yes, sure. You would find it hard to deal with that fact, but oh well.If there is no God then all what we see is a result of human differences and just the way we are.
Well, religions are protected by this consensus just as are my views.Some might say ban religion but then aren't you going against human rights and views anyway.
Yeah, but as you keep pointing out: People disagree; many disagree with your ideas what the simple rules should look like, many have different ideas what they should look like, others (like me) think that they can´t be simple because they need to account for the complexity and diversity of humans and situations.From what I have said it has been pretty simple.
We are working our way towards them. It´s not easy, we´re not there, and the rules are anything but simple and will never be as simple as they were in ancient times when life was less complex.We need a simple and clear set of morals we can depend on that will unite us or at least allow us to use as a foundation for building on.
Exactly, that´s the same problem for you and for me. That isn´t solved by saying "We need to accept my ideas.", and it isn´t solved by saying "Take the ideas that I believe my God to have". This disagreement you keep harping on is there, and it won´t go away for you of all. Your opinion is just one of those countless different opinions.I understand your views about what we should have. But as a world we all disagree on that.
No, we can have them because we can have them. We don´t need anyone or anything to allow us our views.So I guess we can have different views because society says we can.
Thats fair enough and I am not trying to push my beliefs onto others. As I have said before it wouldn't work as secular society is designed to not be tied down especially to anything religious. I would say that what I believe isn't my opinion even if you say that it is what I say. I am not that wise to come up with some of the things Jesus said.Except that neither you nor I can bypass our thinking - so let´s not pretend that it could possibly be about something else. I am not all-knowing, and you are not God´s brain or mouth piece.
Thus, unless you can show that something is not your mere opinion, it will be treated as your opinion just like everybody else´s, and it will not elevate you above the differences in opinion that you keep decrying.
But dont you think whatever is happening now isn't really working after all this time.Any one-fits-all solution does not account for it, and therefore any simple solution is bound to fail.
It wouldn't worry me as I have been in that situation before. I know exactly what goes on.Thats the trouble I have no problems living that way in so far as ability. Its harder to live as a Christian really. I have never really understood the basis for morality in the world. I have a clear idea now but I am not sure what it would be as far as my everyday life is concerned without that even though I use to live that way. I mean I had some good values but they didn't belong to anything in particular and then they could be changed depending on situations.Yes, sure. You would find it hard to deal with that fact, but oh well.
That´s what I told you right away: You may not like the basis for a morality in reality in the absence of God, but that doesn´t change the fact that it is a sufficient basis given the hypothetical situation.
But dont you think its not that simple. Like I said we can know what to do but not do it. Our societies are geared on self. We know right now if we stopped relying on commercialism and shared things with the hungry we could save millions of lives. We do some but nowhere enough and we are capable of doing it. But its the will or maybe I should say spirit.We are doing it all the time. A consensus is something you have to work for.
I have accepted that. This world is what it is and I or no one can change that. But even though secular society will allow for that complexity of ideas and views in the mean time something has to become the guiding factor. There will always be something that fills the void. If you want to have a free society then you have to think very carefully about what you promote and associate yourself with as many are open to influence. With freedom comes great responsibility.Yeah, but as you keep pointing out: People disagree; many disagree with your ideas what the simple rules should look like, many have different ideas what they should look like, others (like me) think that they can´t be simple because they need to account for the complexity and diversity of humans and situations.
So you need to make up your mind: You either take your "people disagree" premise seriously or you don´t.
I think some things are very simple. But they are hard to do because they demand sacrifice. Like I said I think we know what needs to be done but its doing it thats the hard thing. We are to entrenched in our way of lives. We could feed the world now if we wanted to and every single person would have a little of enough and no one would have to die for lack of food and medicine.We are working our way towards them. It´s not easy, we´re not there, and the rules are anything but simple and will never be as simple as they were in ancient times when life was less complex.
yes I am well aware of this. But I have seen the power of a united front for good. The ironic thing is in the end if we keep going we will end up with some sort of one world government where a lot of people will be doing things they dont necessarily agree with anyway.Exactly, that´s the same problem for you and for me. That isn´t solved by saying "We need to accept my ideas.", and it isn´t solved by saying "Take the ideas that I believe my God to have". This disagreement you keep harping on is there, and it won´t go away for you of all. Your opinion is just one of those countless different opinions.
Its not so much I dont like it. I just dont understand it. But I do accept it and get on with my life.But again I am finding myself tangled up in your digressions.
You asked me for the basis in the absence of a God, and I gave it to you.
I predicted you won´t like it (and that you would prefer a divine command), and, alas, that´s where we are.
Thats fair enough and noble of you. But what if that someone you will support to be allowed to have their beliefs does something you believe is causing damage to your society or leading your children astray.My choice is clear: I tolerate your ideas of sexuality, I will use every opportunity to support you in your quest to live up to it, I will also support that you aren´t kept from claiming that your God sides with you, I will also support that you keep being allowed to advocate simple solutions to complex problems.
Pretty much everything I would do for everybody else. But you don´t get special treatment or the status of the mouth piece of objectivity just because of your preferences
But your opinion as to whether it is your opinion or not is still your opinion. Unless you can demonstrate it to be a fact, you are in the same boat as the rest of us.I would say that what I believe isn't my opinion even if you say that it is what I say.
That we have adopted an opinion from someone whom we consider wiser than ourselves doesn´t change anything about it being our opinion.I am not that wise to come up with some of the things Jesus said.
If I were to summarize this paragraph, I would - in contradiction to your introduction to it - say it is easier for you to live as a Christian.It wouldn't worry me as I have been in that situation before. I know exactly what goes on.Thats the trouble I have no problems living that way in so far as ability. Its harder to live as a Christian really. I have never really understood the basis for morality in the world. I have a clear idea now but I am not sure what it would be as far as my everyday life is concerned without that even though I use to live that way. I mean I had some good values but they didn't belong to anything in particular and then they could be changed depending on situations.
I said it´s hard work. I didn´t say it was simple.But dont you think its not that simple.
See above: I would agree with this, but it is completely irrelevant for the question about the basis.Like I said we can know what to do but not do it.
You are simplifying things. "Our societies" are a mixture of very different tendencies, convictions and ideals. "Our societies are geared on the self" is just selective perception. You are part of society, I am part of society. Neither of us is "geared on the self", and I know plenty of others who aren´t. So there. Don´t make sweeping generalization.Our societies are geared on self. We know right now if we stopped relying on commercialism and shared things with the hungry we could save millions of lives. We do some but nowhere enough and we are capable of doing it. But its the will or maybe I should say spirit.
I have accepted that. This world is what it is and I or no one can change that.
Which void? People do have their convictions - there is no void. Just because they are different than mine doesn´t mean there´s a void in them.But even though secular society will allow for that complexity of ideas and views in the mean time something has to become the guiding factor. There will always be something that fills the void.
No doubt. But you say that about a "free society" as if the same weren´t true about an unfree society.If you want to have a free society then you have to think very carefully about what you promote and associate yourself with as many are open to influence. With freedom comes great responsibility.
So we are back at: 'even if people know what´s best to do, they often don´t do it'. Again: This isn´t an argument for or against any conviction or whatever. It´s just an observation that affects whatever conviction, including yours. And assuming for a moment that there is a God, it is quite obviously affecting his conviction as well, since it is a problem that his believers have to.I think some things are very simple. But they are hard to do because they demand sacrifice. Like I said I think we know what needs to be done but its doing it thats the hard thing. We are to entrenched in our way of lives. We could feed the world now if we wanted to and every single person would have a little of enough and no one would have to die for lack of food and medicine.
Yes, what to it? Again: we agree that people have different opinions. You needn´t bring it up time and again, as though it´s something that can be blamed on anything in particular. It´s a fact.Thats fair enough and noble of you. But what if that someone you will support to be allowed to have their beliefs does something you believe is causing damage to your society or leading your children astray.
Marriage needs defense from being used as a means to pride and from alteration of meaning.
"each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband"
"Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord"
"Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh."
"He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord. "
"It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife"
"House and wealth are inherited from fathers, but a prudent wife is from the Lord."
"But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."
The list goes on. I swear, I couldn't find a single thing which would lead me to think it was ever believed by anyone, including Jesus, that it's okay for homosexuals to marry. Direct me please?
Found this though:
"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?