[Coke1]

Religion is only going to die out, and in 100 years time they will laugh at how stupid people were.
And history essays will be about religious idiots on TSR who use the bible as an excuse to hate gays.

[Perseveranze]

(Original post by Coke1)
Religion is only going to die out, and in 100 years time they will laugh at how stupid people were.
And history essays will be about religious idiots on TSR who use the bible as an excuse to hate gays.

Exactly. That's what I'm saying, no more hating on Incest, Paedophilia and Bestiality and the lot of them, it'll just be fun laughs at how "intolerant" we were towards them.

[ufo2012]

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Exactly. That's what I'm saying, no more hating on Incest, Paedophilia and Bestiality and the lot of them, it'll just be fun laughs at how "intolerant" we were towards them.

lol I doubt that very much, those things will still be considered disgusting regardless of religion.

[.eXe]

(Original post by ufo2012)
lol I doubt that very much, those things will still be considered disgusting regardless of religion.

Why? What's immoral about falling in love with a dog?

-[Posted via mobile app]-

[ufo2012]

(Original post by .eXe)
Why? What's immoral about falling in love with a dog?

[chrisawhitmore]

(Original post by .eXe)
Why? What's immoral about falling in love with a dog?

-[Posted via mobile app]-

I'd go with the non-consensual sex with something incapable of properly understanding the situation part.

[.eXe]

(Original post by chrisawhitmore)
I'd go with the non-consensual sex with something incapable of properly understanding the situation part.

Um I said 'falling in love' with a dog, not 'having sex with a dog'. What if you're in love with a dog, kiss it, hug it, buy it gifts and take it out on dates? Surely that's not immoral?

-[Posted via mobile app]-

[Astronomical]

Morality is purely a social construct, ergo nothing is inherently immoral.

[High VOLTAGE]

COOL, so in 40 years time we'll go from detesting incest to granting people who commit incest the right to marry yeah?
All this progressive stuff is really taking us in the a great direction (!)

[High VOLTAGE]

(Original post by Astronomical)
Morality is purely a social construct, ergo nothing is inherently immoral.

Child rape - is that immoral?

[Astronomical]

(Original post by High VOLTAGE)
Child rape - is that immoral?

Please attempt to stay on topic.

Nothing is inherently immoral. Morality is not an objective quality that is ascribed to actions or objects, and what is immoral today was perfectly fine in the past. Morality is baseless and arbitrary; nothing has an intrinsic "moral value"; it is not a natural concept.

It is criminal and unacceptable to rape children, or indeed anyone else, of course, but I see no value in attaching to it an empty, and completely subjective label such as "immoral". It is superfluous and adds no value.

Examples:
- today it would be seen as immoral to keep slaves; historically it was common, indeed it was seen as a positive thing.
- today is a man married a 14 year old girl it would be seen as immoral, whereas historically it has been the normal marrying age of females.

[chrisawhitmore]

(Original post by .eXe)
Um I said 'falling in love' with a dog, not 'having sex with a dog'. What if you're in love with a dog, kiss it, hug it, buy it gifts and take it out on dates? Surely that's not immoral?

-[Posted via mobile app]-

Well, it's a little odd, and might not be allowed in most posh restaurants, but I couldn't speak as to its morality.

[kingme]

(Original post by Astronomical)
It is criminal and unacceptable to rape children, or indeed anyone else, of course, but I see no value in attaching to it an empty, and completely subjective label such as "immoral". It is superfluous and adds no value.

Without morality, you would not have society.

So there.

[EonBlueApocalypse]

is heterosexuality immoral? There's your answer.

[.eXe]

(Original post by kingme)
Without morality, you would not have society.

So there.

Actually that's entirely opposite. It's without society that the world wouldn't have morality. At least subjective morality.

Think about it...morality is greatly affected by time and location. A small tribe in the amazonian jungles may have an entirely different moral system than an individual in the US or a person in Dubai. Additionally, a person in the 1850's may have had entirely different morals than 1940's Germany or us today. Morality is greatly affected by the society which creates and normalizes it. So no, you're wrong to say that morality is required for society. It's actually the opposite which is true.

[kingme]

(Original post by .eXe)
Actually that's entirely opposite. It's without society that the world wouldn't have morality. At least subjective morality.

Think about it...morality is greatly affected by time and location. A small tribe in the amazonian jungles may have an entirely different moral system than an individual in the US or a person in Dubai. Additionally, a person in the 1850's may have had entirely different morals than 1940's Germany or us today. Morality is greatly affected by the society which creates and normalizes it. So no, you're wrong to say that morality is required for society. It's actually the opposite which is true.

Although the morals in these settings are different, you cannot have an amoral society. The exsistence of a set of morals, even if they barely extend beyond a primal pack mentality, is a precusor to any functional society.

[NYU2012]

(Original post by kingme)
Although the morals in these settings are different, you cannot have an amoral society. The exsistence of a set of morals, even if they barely extend beyond a primal pack mentality, is a precusor to any functional society.

False. You can have a society filled with moral nihilists, etc.

Morality is not a necessary feature for the development of a society; it may merely just be sufficient.

[Antichrist666]

Gayness is being homosexual,which is a choice.

[NYU2012]

(Original post by Antichrist666)
Gayness is being homosexual,which is a choice.

(1) No, there is no such thing as 'gayness'. People are homosexual, which is a sexual orientation; it's not a mannerism; a way of life; anything of that nature. Being gay is merely a sexual orientation

(2) Homosexuality is not a choice. Have you actually ever studied psychology? Done any research on sexual orientations? Maybe read the official positions of all of the world's leading psychological and psychiatric associations? Because if not, just to update you, they all have clear research indicating sexual orientation is not a choice and cannot be changed.

Have you been living under a rock?

[HDBrowne]

(Original post by High VOLTAGE)
COOL, so in 40 years time we'll go from detesting incest to granting people who commit incest the right to marry yeah?
All this progressive stuff is really taking us in the a great direction (!)

They already do, and always have.