What is sexually immoral?

[Me Myself]

It's desecration, that's why. Respect for the dead is a hallmark of sapience, rational or not.

but the dead grandma said it was okay.

Furthermore, let´s say grandma said she would like it.

 

[Storm]

but the dead grandma said it was okay.

Furthermore, let´s say grandma said she would like it.

Love how you totally ignored Drole's post.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If one wants to point out the futility of debating with someone who is simply trying to be offensive. Yes.

I wasn't being offensive at all. It sucks when I try to be a very, nice person, and I always get the blame, and when I do what I'd like, I always get the blame as well.

Hence your continued comparison of homosexuality and necrophilia. They are not comparable psychologically or physically, and as someone who is attracted to the same sex I ask that you stop.

I never compared them, in fact, the first post I said was that they were all completely different

 

[Me Myself]

Where did I say your quoted sentence?
They're not comparable because a same-sex act involves two consenting adults whereas a necrophilic act involves at best an object and at worst the remains of a non-consenting person. We assume that people have some say in the disposition of their bodies, hence funeral arrangements, cremation requests or refusals and the like. Necrophilic acts violate these wishes.

Psychologically necrophilia is a paraphilia and if the fantasy significantly harms the individual's life then a diagnosis may be made. As noted in the research below, it is not a natural orientation, but often a reaction to poor-self esteem and perceived lack of romantic/sexual prospects. Wanting a "non-resisting partner" is not a healthy state of mind.

Hopefully that satisfies your "this is why they're not comparable" desire.

Same-sex acts are not comparable, they're consenting, they're part of health sexual expression and homosexuality itself is a sexual orientation.

Well, you are indeed trying which rocks

Legality wise you are right and it is simple. that´s why I was wondering what happens if the person agreed to it before giving her body to the one that will have sex with it.

About the non resistance, then would you deem immoral to have sex with a person that is alive and likes to not move at all during sex? Let´s say s/he likes complete control over her body to be to his/her partner and s/he only let´s his/her body be moved like a rag doll. Which this kind of sex also be immoral given your specific objection to necrophilia?

 

[Me Myself]

Love how you totally ignored Drole's post.

While you were writing this I was replying to it

I think a little benefit of the doubt is indeed too much to ask

 

[Straw Dog]

Obviously, there are moral boundaries to everything (unless you believe otherwise), but our current society DOES create moral boundaries for every aspect of our lives, even sexuality.

What would you yourself deem "inappropriate" sexual behavior in public? What would you deem "immoral" sexual behavior, no matter what?

Cool avatar.

I view all morality as personal to any individual, even if they believe their particular moral codes are absolute or universal. So whenever I'm mentioning morality here, it's only relative to my own experience.

I refrain from promiscuous sexual behavior because it increases the risk of STDs and decreases the value of meaningful relationships. My intellect requires bonding on a more sophisticated level than what a one night stand with a stranger is capable of satisfying. Furthermore, sex is actually more pleasurable with someone that you truly love and get to know intimately than it is with a total stranger, which might actually become awkward at some point.

 

[Storm]

Well, you are indeed trying which rocks

Legality wise you are right and it is simple. that´s why I was wondering what happens if the person agreed to it before giving her body to the one that will have sex with it.

About the non resistance, then would you deem immoral to have sex with a person that is alive and likes to not move at all during sex? Let´s say s/he likes complete control over her body to be to his/her partner and s/he only let´s his/her body be moved like a rag doll. Which this kind of sex also be immoral given your specific objection to necrophilia?

More like having sex with someone you roofied, in my book. Do I need to explain why that's immoral, too?

 

[methylatedghosts]

About the non resistance, then would you deem immoral to have sex with a person that is alive and likes to not move at all during sex? Let´s say s/he likes complete control over her body to be to his/her partner and s/he only let´s his/her body be moved like a rag doll. Which this kind of sex also be immoral given your specific objection to necrophilia?

I'm surprised that you could view that as being the same...

 

[Storm]

While you were writing this I was replying to it

I think a little benefit of the doubt is indeed too much to ask

When you compare homosex to necrophilia? Yeah, there's no doubt to benefit from.

 

[Me Myself]

More like having sex with someone you roofied, in my book. Do I need to explain why that's immoral, too?

roofying? no, that´s rape, is simple. But let´s say the person is completely lucid and she likes having sex this way.

 

[Drolefille]

I wasn't being offensive at all. It sucks when I try to be a very, nice person, and I always get the blame, and when I do what I'd like, I always get the blame as well.

You're talking about violating a taboo after specifically stating you like to antagonize people by violating taboos. Mostly that's being a jerk, but it's not nearly as ~*edgy*~ as some people like to think.

Playing the victim after that - complaining of bullying and of being a "very, nice person" but being picked on - makes you seem insincere at best. How you are being responded to is directly related to how you have spoken.

I never compared them, in fact, the first post I said was that they were all completely different

You continually compared them by equating a negative response to necrophilia to a negative response to homosexuality. Over and over.

but the dead grandma said it was okay.

Furthermore, let´s say grandma said she would like it.

Unrelated to the healthiness of necrophilia for the individual involved. As i said, at best, a corpse is an object, this does not change the rest of the post.

 

[Storm]

roofying? no, that´s rape, is simple. But let´s say the person is completely lucid and she likes having sex this way.

Then it's not necrophilia, or comparable to it.

 

[Me Myself]

When you compare homosex to necrophilia? Yeah, there's no doubt to benefit from.

comparing means the act of seeing both differences and similarities.

When people say things like what I just bolded they reveal an incapacity to do this, this means you are too scared or repulsed to think, which means you will not be able to think straight on this. If you do not overcome that, you will not be able to know your position better.

 

[methylatedghosts]

Some of the posts I see in here, makes me wonder what people REALLY ... desire...

 

[Storm]

comparing means the act of seeing both differences and similarities.

When people say things like what I just bolded they reveal an incapacity to do this, this means you are too scared or repulsed to think, which means you will not be able to think straight on this. If you do not overcome that, you will not be able to know your position better.

If I want long distance psychology, I'll go to Drole. At least she's qualified.

Would you like to respond to my points rather than flail pathetically in a field you have no qualifications for?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

You're talking about violating a taboo after specifically stating you like to antagonize people by violating taboos. Mostly that's being a jerk, but it's not nearly as ~*edgy*~ as some people like to think.

I wasn't talking about violating a taboo, if I was to be offensive in this thread, I'd actually compare the two.

Playing the victim after that - complaining of bullying and of being a "very, nice person" but being picked on - makes you seem insincere at best. How you are being responded to is directly related to how you have spoken.

What is even the difference between being picked on and bullying?

Tell me what I said to purposely offend Storm?

I'm not at all trying to be insincere, I'm trying to not get my reputation out of line again.

In attempt to be civil, this is what it turns to... I wasn't even responding harshly.

 

[Me Myself]

Then it's not necrophilia, or comparable to it.

You obviously don´t understand what "compare" means.

We could compare 2 completely different things and it would still be called a comparison. What makes it a comparison is to do it step by step element by element. When you speak as a whole, you are not being able to compare correctly, because that needs a dissemination of the elements of that things which are being compared.

 

[Drolefille]

Well, you are indeed trying which rocks

Legality wise you are right and it is simple. that´s why I was wondering what happens if the person agreed to it before giving her body to the one that will have sex with it.

This is moving the goalposts as there may be a handful of cases where this has ever occurred.
Assume that, like the vast majority of people, no one consented to having the corpse involved in an act of coitus.

About the non resistance, then would you deem immoral to have sex with a person that is alive and likes to not move at all during sex? Let´s say s/he likes complete control over her body to be to his/her partner and s/he only let´s his/her body be moved like a rag doll. Which this kind of sex also be immoral given your specific objection to necrophilia?

I would consider it unhealthy if this is the only type of sex that either party preferred or was interested in in the same way I consider necrophilia unhealthy (note, a random necrophilic fantasy is not the same thing as engaging in or fixating on necrophilic behavior). However as long as the partner is conscious and capable of consenting or more importantly of revoking consent at any time, then this is not immoral.

Acts between adults cannot be compared to necrophilic acts because of the ability to give consent.

 

[Storm]

You obviously don´t understand what "compare" means.

We could compare 2 completely different things and it would still be called a comparison. What makes it a comparison is to do it step by step element by element. When you speak as a whole, you are not being able to compare correctly, because that needs a dissemination of the elements of that things which are being compared.

I didn't say compare, I said comparable:
1. capable of being compared; having features in common with something else to permit or suggest comparison: He considered the Roman and British empires to be comparable.
2. worthy of comparison: shops comparable to those on Fifth Avenue.

3. usable for comparison; similar: We have no comparable data on Russian farming.

Synonyms
1. like, equal, equivalent, similar.

 

[Me Myself]

Unrelated to the healthiness of necrophilia for the individual involved. As i said, at best, a corpse is an object, this does not change the rest of the post.

You mean about unresistant sex? then I ask you:

About the non resistance, then would you deem immoral to have sex with a person that is alive and likes to not move at all during sex? Let´s say s/he likes complete control over her body to be to his/her partner and s/he only let´s his/her body be moved like a rag doll. Which this kind of sex also be immoral given your specific objection to necrophilia?