Planned Parenthood Perverting Our Kids!

[Darth Ovious]

Or, in this instance, the common-sense majority opinion uncontaminated by the unsubstantiated religious opinion of a few.

What????????

[seer]

What is the negative effect of the normalization and mainstreaming of homosexual behavior?

It is as immoral...

[JimL]

It is as immoral...

Why is it immoral?

[rogue06]

Pixie - hatred and prejudice and bigotry are harmful.

Indeed

Source: Scripps College Hosts Segregated Pool Party

Source

© Copyright Original Source

Funny how those who shout the loudest about discrimination also tend to turn a blind eye to things like this which are increasingly common at some colleges (where things like bake sales that charge different prices depending on your race and sex have been going on for years). Imagine the reaction in the MSM if this were an event where only white people were allowed to attend and yet good luck finding anything about this.

[seer]

Why is it immoral?

Why is it moral?

[JimL]

Why is it moral?

I didn't say it was, I simply asked you to explain your assertion, i.e. why is homosexuality immoral?

[JimL]

Indeed

Source: Scripps College Hosts Segregated Pool Party

Source

© Copyright Original Source

Funny how those who shout the loudest about discrimination also tend to turn a blind eye to things like this which are increasingly common at some colleges (where things like bake sales that charge different prices depending on your race and sex have been going on for years). Imagine the reaction in the MSM if this were an event where only white people were allowed to attend and yet good luck finding anything about this.

As it turns out, apparently the MSM's airing of the story caused the college to desegregate the event. So who's turning a blind eye? Besides that, why are you looking for excuses to be discriminatory. Carpe just stated a fact, he wasn't asking for instances where discrimination took place, or who the worst discriminators are.

[seer]

I didn't say it was, I simply asked you to explain your assertion, i.e. why is homosexuality immoral?

So you don't know of it is moral or not? Got it...

[carpedm9587]

There you go with an argumentum ad populum again!

Descriptum ad populum would be more accurate.

Again with the fallacy! If the vast majority thought a particular minority was inferior what do we learn from that - one thing alone - the vast majority believe a particular race is inferior.

Correct.

So saying that the vast majority hold certain values does not tell us anything about the worth, rightness or importance of those values.

Core values of humanity tend to be "core" because they are foundational in some way: if we did not value them and derive moral laws to protect/enhance them, then other things we value would have a lower probability of being possible. So, for example, if I value "pizza toppings" but not "life," there is a good chance I won't be alive to value pizza toppings. If I value pizza toppings but not liberty, there is a good chance I wouldn't be free to enjoy the pizza toppings. As a consequence, there are things we value "more deeply" than we value other things. These are the things that do not "change at the drop of a hat." They are not "whimsical." They are not experienced by most of humanity as "trivial." They are so common and so foundational, they are embedded in the "absolute/universal" moral codes of most major religions and codified in the legal systems of most countries.

And you labeling certain preferences as trivial has no weight.

Seer, you can make this claim until you are blue in the face. Anyone reading this post will immediately recognize the reality of the fact that humans value life and liberty above pizza toppings and beer choices. They (and I) know your continuous attempts to equate the two is nothing more than an attempt to engage in Technique #2: minimize/ridicule. As I noted, it's an effective debate tactic - but it does nothing to further an exploration of the truth.

And I may have to credit you with Technique #4 as well: the turn around. If someone accuses you of prejudice, accuse them of prejudice for accusing you of prejudice. If someone accuses you of ridiculing; accuse them of being the one who is ridiculing by pointing out that you are ridiculing. Again, it is a very powerful debate tactic. It just doesn't do much to advance a reasonable argument. Indeed, the next step will probably be to tell me that I am engaging in "debate tactics" by pointing out that you are engaging in debate tactics.

I continue to wait for someone who can make a rational argument for why relative/subjective morality is nonfunctional without a) pointing out over and over again that it's not absolute/objective, b) minimizing it with appeals to "merely," "just," or "pizza toppings," or c) appealing to outrage by hauling in those bad old Nazis (or their equivalent) and those unfortunate Jewish children in each discussion. I thought you were the person to bring something solid into the mix - but so far....?

[carpedm9587]

Indeed

Source: Scripps College Hosts Segregated Pool Party

Source

© Copyright Original Source

Funny how those who shout the loudest about discrimination also tend to turn a blind eye to things like this which are increasingly common at some colleges (where things like bake sales that charge different prices depending on your race and sex have been going on for years). Imagine the reaction in the MSM if this were an event where only white people were allowed to attend and yet good luck finding anything about this.

This is the first I see this, so I cannot be accused of "turning a blind eye." I have also said, repeatedly, "you cannot solve a racial problem with racist solutions," so I agree with your objection. What is being described here is a racist solution. If the problem is, "people are being treated differently on the basis of their skin color," the solution is not "let's get people of the same skin color together." The latter perpetuates the former. That is why I would not permit "Black Enterprise" in my home. Much as I value what they are trying to achieve, if I cannot permit "White Enterprise" into my house, I am not going to permit "Black Enterprise" either. It is why I believe Affirmative Action is a mistake. If the problem is "schools are discriminating against minority students," it is not solved by forcing them to discriminate against white students.

This is not a popular view on the left. It is one of the many reasons my "left" friends see me as "a conservative in disguise," and "disingenuous" and "intellectually dishonest."

Go figure...

[JimL]

So you don't know of it is moral or not? Got it...

Didn't say that either, simply asked you to explain your assertion, i.e. explain why homosexuality is immoral?

[seer]

Didn't say that either, simply asked you to explain your assertion, i.e. explain why homosexuality is immoral?

Jim, I can't help you if you don't know if it is moral or not. You have to figure it out yourself...

[seer]

Core values of humanity tend to be "core" because they are foundational in some way: if we did not value them and derive moral laws to protect/enhance them, then other things we value would have a lower probability of being possible. So, for example, if I value "pizza toppings" but not "life," there is a good chance I won't be alive to value pizza toppings. If I value pizza toppings but not liberty, there is a good chance I wouldn't be free to enjoy the pizza toppings. As a consequence, there are things we value "more deeply" than we value other things. These are the things that do not "change at the drop of a hat." They are not "whimsical." They are not experienced by most of humanity as "trivial." They are so common and so foundational, they are embedded in the "absolute/universal" moral codes of most major religions and codified in the legal systems of most countries.

No Carp, this still does not give you the right, logical or otherwise, to trivialize what other people may see as important, or most important.

Seer, you can make this claim until you are blue in the face. Anyone reading this post will immediately recognize the reality of the fact that humans value life and liberty above pizza toppings and beer choices. They (and I) know your continuous attempts to equate the two is nothing more than an attempt to engage in Technique #2: minimize/ridicule. As I noted, it's an effective debate tactic - but it does nothing to further an exploration of the truth.

Right, you are still arguing like a teenager - mom everyone does it! Even if most people agree with you you are still committing a fallacy. Again, if the majority of people believed is was good and needful to enslave a small minority - what does that tell us? In other words why is what the majority values right or good or worthy?

I continue to wait for someone who can make a rational argument for why relative/subjective morality is nonfunctional without a) pointing out over and over again that it's not absolute/objective, b) minimizing it with appeals to "merely," "just," or "pizza toppings," or c) appealing to outrage by hauling in those bad old Nazis (or their equivalent) and those unfortunate Jewish children in each discussion. I thought you were the person to bring something solid into the mix - but so far....?

That has already been done, that's why you bowed out of the discussion: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...Breach)/page80

[Charles]

Jim, I can't help you if you don't know if it is moral or not. You have to figure it out yourself...

If I remember correctly you believe in universal moral values and yet you cannot tell why homosexuality is wrong but need for those who might disagree with you to figure out for themselves. I guess you should consider whether your view is really universal then.

[JimL]

Jim, I can't help you if you don't know if it is moral or not. You have to figure it out yourself...

Why can't you help me to know what you know? You say that you know that homosexuality is immoral, so tell me why it is immoral. Or are you saying that you don't really know why it is immoral, but that it just is?