Is 'the order of nature' a valid argument? - I say yes.

[nnmartin]

my last post has covered that already.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

my last post has covered that already.

What? Your "women only" post?

You're not serious, are you?

 

[painted wolf]

Who's culture gets to decide what is "natural"?

Different groups of humans today and throughout time have had different opinions on the subject... who is right?

For example there are cultures who thought that it was perfectly "natural" to eat their dead as a sign of respect and unity with the dead. Clearly this view isn't held by every human and others have thought this was "unnatural" and violently repressed those that practiced such rituals.

wa:do

 

[McBell]

Who's culture gets to decide what is "natural"?

Different groups of humans today and throughout time have had different opinions on the subject... who is right?

For example there are cultures who thought that it was perfectly "natural" to eat their dead as a sign of respect and unity with the dead. Clearly this view isn't held by every human and others have thought this was "unnatural" and violently repressed those that practiced such rituals.

wa:do

nnmartin has gone to great lengths in this thread to set it up so that he can pick and choose at his whim what is natural, what is moral, and what is biological.

 

[painted wolf]

nnmartin has gone to great lengths in this thread to set it up so that he can pick and choose at his whim what is natural, what is moral, and what is biological.

You mean like how my internet connection is perfectly natural while my apartment building and dinner isn't. :sarcastic

wa:do

 

[nnmartin]

What? Your "women only" post?

You're not serious, are you?

Well in accordance with the rules of the Order then yes, dildo usage would apply to women only.

surely you can see how that fits in with the main clause.

I'm not saying you have to agree with it of course but the rules are fairly straightforward I believe.

 

[nnmartin]

Who's culture gets to decide what is "natural"?

No culture decides.

The Natural Order is the same for everyone.

 

[idav]

No culture decides.

The Natural Order is the same for everyone.

Should we bring back sacrifices?

 

[nnmartin]

nnmartin has gone to great lengths in this thread to set it up so that he can pick and choose at his whim what is natural, what is moral, and what is biological.

That really isn't the case.

Here we are dealing with universal themes.

Nature is nature.

Remember, though - I have said that at times our morals can deviate from the Order as long as they do not go against the flow.

for example - human cloning would be out.

 

[nnmartin]

idav: sacrifices are not part of the Order.

 

[Meow Mix]

Well , in the case of an animal consent is not such a concern due to the low intelligence factor.

Actually a lot of mammals (and some birds, etc.) are more sapient and sentient than you might think.

Bestiality is wrong mainly because Man was not designed to have sex with animals (no chance of reproduction here)

You're essentially saying that it's wrong because it doesn't lead to reproduction, but why is something wrong if it doesn't lead to reproduction? Why is that a moral issue?

Consent does not apply in necrophila because a dead body is an inanimate object.

It seems true prima facie that we generally still consider the body the possession of the deceased entity that once inhabited it -- which makes vandalizing it through sex just as much a moral issue as vandalizing a deceased person's house.

However , this is against the order due to lack of reproductive ability. (as well as overriding moral concerns)

What overriding moral concerns? You seem to be back to saying "it's immoral because I think it's immoral," but without explaining why. In fact, that seems to be what you've been doing this whole time as far as I can tell. (I'm not the only one that's noticed this, so maybe if that isn't the case, you just aren't explaining well?)

I've provided a moral theory that seems to fit much better: beastiality, pedophilia and necrophilia have moral connotations in that they are all activities which involve the lack of consent by someone; therefore causing harm to someone/something.

 

[nnmartin]

depravity alone is a good enough reason to ban those 3 activities - however that is another debate.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well in accordance with the rules of the Order then yes, dildo usage would apply to women only.

surely you can see how that fits in with the main clause.

I'm not saying you have to agree with it of course but the rules are fairly straightforward I believe.

Of course. I completely recognize "the rules of the Order". It's only one rule, really, and completely straightforward:

Things that you arbitrarily, subjectively decide should be in are in, things you arbitrarily, subjectively decide should be out are out.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

depravity alone is a good enough reason to ban those 3 activities - however that is another debate.

That's no answer. You're simply using another word that means "things I don't like."

 

[Meow Mix]

depravity alone is a good enough reason to ban those 3 activities - however that is another debate.

While I also consider those things depraved, you're still not answering the question as Gjall noticed.

What makes them depraved?

It seems to me that they are morally wrong because they involve harming someone directly or indirectly through a lack of consent.

There is no harm involved in a mature homosexual relationship, so I'm not understanding why it's even a moral situation -- so far I don't think you've provided a consistent reason for why homosexuality has any moral connotations at all.

 

[nnmartin]

There are two current and very long threads that deal with incest and bestiality (and also touch on necro) so I have no wish to enter the specifics of those issues again.

However, you must agree that Man or Woman was not designed to have sex with beast or lifeless body?

Incest is also against the Order mainly due to the offspring that result from it.

 

[idav]

idav: sacrifices are not part of the Order.

Culture determined that just like slavery.

 

[nnmartin]

so far I don't think you've provided a consistent reason for why homosexuality has any moral connotations at all.

I don't think I've even mentioned homosexuality at all in this thread; not specifically at least.

And morality and the Order are not necessarily the same.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

There are two current and very long threads that deal with incest and bestiality (and also touch on necro) so I have no wish to enter the specifics of those issues again.

However, you must agree that Man or Woman was not designed to have sex with beast or lifeless body?

Incest is also against the Order mainly due to the offspring that result from it.

You're dodging again.

 

[nnmartin]

ok - give me a straightforward question about the Order and I will try to answer.