Sexual morality

[nazz]

Your opinion.

My opinion on what you should do? I don't have one.

My opinion as to what people should do in general? None of my business

Is it the right sexual ethic for me? No.

 

[Sunstone]

... please not go off topic talking about things that are not "sexual acts".

Are you mad? This is RF!

 

[McBell]

Are you mad? This is RF!

For last 15 years been accused of being weird, but since it is my children making the accusation I cannot help but wonder how much their bias and prejudice are influencing the charge.

Does that count?

 

[nazz]

It means if you want to have gay sex, then go ahead. If you want to have an orgy with your neighbor, then go ahead. Just as long as every individual who is affected by it is involved willingly.

So it's okay to cheat on my wife as long as my adultery partner gives consent?

 

[McBell]

So it's okay to cheat on my wife as long as my adultery partner gives consent?

Only if your wife in not an individual...

 

[Tiberius]

So it's okay to cheat on my wife as long as my adultery partner gives consent?

Given that your wife will be affected by it when it eventually comes out that you are cheating (and you'd be crazy to think it will stay secret forever), she will be involved.

 

[Curious George]

Here's an idea regarding what is an acceptable sexual practice and what is not.

As long as all individuals involved in the particular sexual act are consenting, do whatever you want.​

Anyone have thoughts about this?

NOTE: By "being involved", I mean either directly or indirectly.

Yes, I question our ability to define consent, specifically for individuals with disabilities. Our current definitions make it technically impermissible for some individuals to ever have sex. This is comparable to minors, but with minors we are not forever denying sex we are just calling for temporary restraint. However, with certain disabled individuals we are forever imposing a prohibition on a fundamental need.

 

[nazz]

Given that your wife will be affected by it when it eventually comes out that you are cheating (and you'd be crazy to think it will stay secret forever), she will be involved.

I don't think that condition was inherent in your original formulation which just involved consent of the parties engaging in the sexual relations.

 

[McBell]

It means if you want to have gay sex, then go ahead. If you want to have an orgy with your neighbor, then go ahead. Just as long as every individual who is affected by it is involved willingly.

So it's okay to cheat on my wife as long as my adultery partner gives consent?

Given that your wife will be affected by it when it eventually comes out that you are cheating (and you'd be crazy to think it will stay secret forever), she will be involved.

I don't think that condition was inherent in your original formulation which just involved consent of the parties engaging in the sexual relations.

.....

 

[nazz]

.....

apparently the term "original formulation" is too challenging for you. Let me dumb it down for you. It refers to the opening post where it was stated as:

As long as all individuals involved in the particular sexual act are consenting, do whatever you want.

 

[McBell]

apparently the term "original formulation" is too challenging for you. Let me dumb it down for you. It refers to the opening post where it was stated as:

As long as all individuals involved in the particular sexual act are consenting, do whatever you want.

You back peddle well.
No worries though.
The conversation line is there for all the world to see.

 

[nazz]

You back peddle well.
No worries though.
The conversation line is there for all the world to see.

Indeed. Too bad it eludes you.

 

[Tiberius]

apparently the term "original formulation" is too challenging for you. Let me dumb it down for you. It refers to the opening post where it was stated as:

As long as all individuals involved in the particular sexual act are consenting, do whatever you want.

I think I was quite clear throughout this thread that when I said "involved" I meant either directly or indirectly.

 

[nazz]

I think I was quite clear throughout this thread that when I said "involved" I meant either directly or indirectly.

You clarified but your original statement does not make that clear.

 

[Tiberius]

You clarified but your original statement does not make that clear.

I thought it was obvious.

Now, can we get back to the topic? Do you think that the moral guidelines I proposed in the OP are valid? Why or why not?

 

[nazz]

I thought it was obvious.

Now, can we get back to the topic? Do you think that the moral guidelines I proposed in the OP are valid? Why or why not?

I answered that here:

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...616-sexual-morality-post3572567.html#poststop

 

[Tiberius]

I answered that here:

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...616-sexual-morality-post3572567.html#poststop

What sexual ethic is right for you then?

 

[nazz]

What sexual ethic is right for you then?

I'm a Gnostic. It's not so much an ethic as it is an attitude. Sexual desire is part of what keeps us trapped in this material plane. So the goal is to overcome it.

 

[Tiberius]

I fear you have misunderstood what I am asking you.

How do you determine what is acceptable during sex and what is not?

 

[nazz]

I fear you have misunderstood what I am asking you.

How do you determine what is acceptable during sex and what is not?

I understand the question but I'm not sure you are understanding my response. Questions of sexual ethics don't concern me. I'm not interested in delineating sexual activity into categories of acceptable and not.

But if I must provide an answer I would say I would follow the dictates of my own conscience as I do with any ethical question. And my conscience agrees that forcing people into sexual activity against their will is wrong.