Well, there is a link when it comes to cheating, but other than that we have to enter into the realms of dogmatic religious arguments, which to me qualify as immoral in themselves by the very nature of them being dogmatic, historical and untestable.
To me, all sexual contact comes under one of two categories: consentual and non-consentual. If there is consent it is okay, if there is no consent it is not. Everything else is either religious or dogmatic, and should be exempt from any reasonable discussion. That is as far as any sexual ethics discussion need go.
the nature of morality
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Ah. I see those comments are now hidden. Good show. Forget I was here...
--
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Well I do think that there is a link to be discussed between sex and morality, but the way it was brought up was definitely aggressive and irrelevant.
--
dom180
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well, there is a link when it comes to cheating, but other than that we have to enter into the realms of dogmatic religious arguments, which to me qualify as immoral in themselves by the very nature of them being dogmatic, historical and untestable.
--
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Interesting. I see several problems with that.
1) There are plenty of issues of sexual ethics - rape, health, consent, age of consent, prostitution, procreation, pornography, sexual deviation, etc.
2) A moral issue with cheating necessitates a moral component to sex.
3) I don't think religion is necessary to discuss sex.
--
dom180
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
To me, all sexual contact comes under one of two categories: consentual and non-consentual. If there is consent it is okay, if there is no consent it is not. Everything else is either religious or dogmatic, and should be exempt from any reasonable discussion. That is as far as any sexual ethics discussion need go.