Are there Reasonable Moral Grounds to Oppose Open Relationships and Marriages?

[Reine]

I wouldn't want my kids doing anything risky or unhealthy, but I wouldn't try to parent the rest of the world because of it.

Right, and it is not your responsibility to tell spend your days ranting at other people and looking foolish and overbearing to your kids. so, that would be an ineffective way to take a stand. But you would have to take some type of a stand to try to keep your kids from engaging in harmful activities, and every person has their own way. I'm just saying that
1. we have opinions about these things
2. We have the right to have an opinion of these things
3. We have the right to express these opinions
4. Ideal is to find healthy ways to express these opinions so they are effective

So, my answer to the OP is that yes we should take a stand... but we should find the most appropriate way to do it based on the individual situation we are taling about. Everyone's ideas will vary.

 

[Iti oj]

is what is moraly best the same as what is boilogicaly the best or socialy the best?

 

[Father Heathen]

Right, and it is not your responsibility to tell spend your days ranting at other people and looking foolish and overbearing to your kids. so, that would be an ineffective way to take a stand. But you would have to take some type of a stand to try to keep your kids from engaging in harmful activities, and every person has their own way. I'm just saying that
1. we have opinions about these things
2. We have the right to have an opinion of these things
3. We have the right to express these opinions
4. Ideal is to find healthy ways to express these opinions so they are effective

So, my answer to the OP is that yes we should take a stand... but we should find the most appropriate way to do it based on the individual situation we are taling about. Everyone's ideas will vary.

Of course people are entitled to their opinions and the right to voice them, but they should also be prepared to be met with ridicule if the opinions expressed are irrational and unsubstantiated.

 

[Drolefille]

Right, and it is not your responsibility to tell spend your days ranting at other people and looking foolish and overbearing to your kids. so, that would be an ineffective way to take a stand. But you would have to take some type of a stand to try to keep your kids from engaging in harmful activities, and every person has their own way. I'm just saying that
1. we have opinions about these things
2. We have the right to have an opinion of these things
3. We have the right to express these opinions
4. Ideal is to find healthy ways to express these opinions so they are effective

So, my answer to the OP is that yes we should take a stand... but we should find the most appropriate way to do it based on the individual situation we are taling about. Everyone's ideas will vary.

Except you're still talking meta and not about the specific topic of the thread.

 

[Reine]

If someone asks your opinion, you could give it, but do you just want to shout from the street corner all the things you object to? I object to drug use, but outside of my job (which requires I discourage people from illegal activities) I don't feel any right to be heard about my opinion unless engaging others in a discussion on the topic. And if I do so, I better have a good reason to back up my dislike of drug use if I wish that others were prohibited from doing it.

If I just want my kids to not use drugs and hold a family value of sobriety, well then I'll raise my kids and hope to instill those values. Even if teens tend towards this: :ignore:

A reason to back up your dislike of drug use can be as simple as you have seen through your experiences in your lifetime that involvement with drugs leads to undesirable outcomes and you have seen that people are more functionable without it. It is your opinion, and you have the right to it. You don't have to proove everything with evidence if your not trying to make it a law. You have a right to your subjective truths, and you have the right to express them. Of course the better you are at expressing them, the more people tend to try understanding where you are comming from, especially if you listen to them to try to understand where they are comming from. For me, I had my kids sign something saying they would not become addicted to drugs or alcohol, because I knew most of them were going to try it at one point or another. I didn't freak out if I found stuff out, but I reminded them not to become addicted... pulled out the sighed paper.. and shouted out after them "Let the blunt pass you by tonight! You don't need it!'

 

[Drolefille]

A reason to back up your dislike of drug use can be as simple as you have seen through your experiences in your lifetime that involvement with drugs leads to undesirable outcomes and you have seen that people are more functionable without it. It is your opinion, and you have the right to it. You don't have to proove everything with evidence if your not trying to make it a law. You have a right to your subjective truths, and you have the right to express them. Of course the better you are at expressing them, the more people tend to try understanding where you are comming from, especially if you listen to them to try to understand where they are comming from. For me, I had my kids sign something saying they would not become addicted to drugs or alcohol, because I knew most of them were going to try it at one point or another. I didn't freak out if I found stuff out, but I reminded them not to become addicted... pulled out the sighed paper.. and shouted out after them "Let the blunt pass you by tonight! You don't need it!'

I feel like you're missing the point that we've been making here so let me go back to the beginning:

Do you find there are reasonable moral grounds to oppose open relationships and/or marriages?

 

[Reine]

Except you're still talking meta and not about the specific topic of the thread.

I know... I was trying to see what all of you would say. I don't think open marriage is a good idea.. but I'm not too sure what it really is. Agreed upon sexual relations with those outside of the marriage? If that is what it is then I would be opposed to that in my own life, and in the lives of my kids. My stand would be to try to discourrage them from that and look up statistics regarding it. I would never engage in it. I would not be afraid to state that I don't think it's a good idea. I would listen to anyone who experienced it and see what they had to say. After researching it, I don't think it should be illeagal, because although it may be damaging, it is too subjective to calculate - so I think strong discouragement would be a better option if signs point to 'it is a damaging behavior'.

 

[Reine]

I feel like you're missing the point that we've been making here so let me go back to the beginning:

Do you find there are reasonable moral grounds to oppose open relationships and/or marriages?

Yes, but my way of opposing them would not be to take a legal stand. I would oppose it on a personal level.

 

[painted wolf]

Can you think of any activities that consenting adults engage in that you don't want to support personally, but you have no proof or other thoughts that they would be damaging to society, but you would rather not see your children engage in them because you think it is immoral and may lead them to a bad place in life... if so, in what ways could you voice an objection or take a stand?

Sure, but I don't spin them as moral issues... my objections are practical.
I don't see consensual activities as immoral, but I can see practical reasons not to do them.

wa:do

 

[Me Myself]

I think opposing something in a personal level (non-legal) because this something feels damaging to you is very reasonable.

As long as it stays in a personal level.

That said I personaly haveno reason to believe open relationships can´t be great for more than one couple alive today. I wouldn´t do it with my girlfriend today OR tomorrow though

 

[Reine]

3. Isn't it as simple as saying "I disagree with X, therefore I won't do X." Why must one 'take a stand' for something in a public sense? Wouldn't 'taking a stand' just a simply be doing what you think is right and raising your kids that way, finding a partner (or partners) who agree with you about your values, etc.?

You can make a big point to say, out loud, in public, "I AM AGAINST X" but for what purpose? And, that doesn't actually address the point at hand which is having a reasonable moral ground. Disagreeing is fine, but without providing it a ground to stand on, you're back to opinion only.


You are very focused on the "right to be heard." One has free speech and the right to speak, but not the right to be heard or listened to. Of course one may speak up on nearly any issue in nearly any location (discussion of explosions in airports and fires in theaters being examples of the exceptions).
1.But a personal subjective objection lacks the reasonableness required in the OP without at the least a lot of philosophical groundwork.

2. Certainly in the hypothetical, but as this is a specific topic it's not enough to say that "if there is objective proof of harm then there can be objection," but instead one must actually show proof of harm.

In short, your points may exist, but they're not substantive at the moment.

What you said about doing the right thing and raising your kids the right way being a stand is the stand I was referring to all along. Sorry I didn't point it out right away... I wanted it to come from you. This is the most important stand you will ever take in your life... the stand you live before your kids with a relationship to them.

 

[Reine]

is what is moraly best the same as what is boilogicaly the best or socialy the best?

No, our morality is subjective and social and biological things aren't determined by our subjective values, IMO.

 

[Iti oj]

I think opposing something in a personal level (non-legal) because this something feels damaging to you is very reasonable.

As long as it stays in a personal level.

That said I personaly haveno reason to believe open relationships can´t be great for more than one couple alive today. I wouldn´t do it with my girlfriend today OR tomorrow though

what if what is good for the goose is not good for the gander? what if these kind o relationships , while not bad for me per say, w ere bad for the human race as a whole?

 

[Reine]

I think opposing something in a personal level (non-legal) because this something feels damaging to you is very reasonable.

As long as it stays in a personal level.

That said I personaly haveno reason to believe open relationships can´t be great for more than one couple alive today. I wouldn´t do it with my girlfriend today OR tomorrow though

Thanks

 

[Reine]

Sure, but I don't spin them as moral issues... my objections are practical.
I don't see consensual activities as immoral, but I can see practical reasons not to do them.

wa:do

Of course.. you are an objective thinker. I forgot, because I am a subjective idealist that sees things a little different than you. It's still the same conclusion I think.... some behaviors are damaging, so it is practical not to do them.

 

[Reine]

Of course people are entitled to their opinions and the right to voice them, but they should also be prepared to be met with ridicule if the opinions expressed are irrational and unsubstantiated.

Yes, anyone has the right to ridicule others and make them feel stupid... or you could help them.

 

[Me Myself]

what if what is good for the goose is not good for the gander? what if these kind o relationships , while not bad for me per say, w ere bad for the human race as a whole?

You´ll have to prove it for starters.

 

[Reine]

If you have no proof then you would have no grounds to "take a stand". Insecurities and knee-jerk reactions aren't valid justifications for limiting the rights of others.

Hopefully people find logical reasons to replace the insecure knee jerk reactions, because personal stands that stem from those types of insecurities have hidden agendas and damaging messages attached to them that are worse than what they are taking a stand agianst. This by far causes the worst kind of damage.

 

[Iti oj]

You´ll have to prove it for starters.

proffs are saved for math and logic. I would provide you with evidence and facts and supply you a theory to tie them all together if i new what you would accept as exeptible evidence. besides were speaking in hypotheticals at the moment. its a what if queston.

 

[Iti oj]

No, our morality is subjective and social and biological things aren't determined by our subjective values, IMO.

agreed, but if a moral stance is based out of biological consiquneces is it worth more weight?