• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Sexual morality

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
Just out of curiosity, how can necrophilia be consensual?

If they consent before death, as I said before.

Actually, I did put conditions on it. ALL individuals involved must be consenting. Doesn't matter if they are directly involved or indirectly involved. The family of someone who dies during sex is indirectly involved in that sexual act.

But as I pointed out before, your family or friends may disapprove of homosexuality, swinging, group sex, BDSM and fetishism so you shouldn't do it if they don't like it. Or your only choice is to live in the closest.
 

StarryNightshade

Spiritually confused Jew
Premium Member
As long as:

A.) It involves adults who are mentally and cognitively capable of full consent.

B.) No individual is coerced into consent

and

C.) Doesn't involve anything illegal which could ultimately bring harm to someone (such as killing them during the act).

Then almost anything is technically fair play.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Speaking in general, I think uncoerced consensual sex between informed individuals above a certain age and of sound minds is their right as humans. I'm not sure I would include sex involving death or irreparable personal injury as acts of individuals of sound minds.
 

Gjallarhorn

N'yog-Sothep
Actually, I did put conditions on it. ALL individuals involved must be consenting. Doesn't matter if they are directly involved or indirectly involved. The family of someone who dies during sex is indirectly involved in that sexual act.

But that's just silly. EVERYONE is indirectly affected by EVERYTHING we do.

No man is an island, yet we do things that "indirectly" affect everyone anyway.

That also makes it so no one can have sex, because someone will always disagree with it, which negates the entire discussion.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
But that's just silly. EVERYONE is indirectly affected by EVERYTHING we do.

No man is an island, yet we do things that "indirectly" affect everyone anyway.

That also makes it so no one can have sex, because someone will always disagree with it, which negates the entire discussion.

Exactly my point! :yes:
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
"Irresponsible sexual actions are immoral, even if they are mutually consensual."

You have aids and you sleep with a girl who doesn't, even though she gives her consent. She gets aids from you. Even though the sex was consensual it was still irresponsible, therefore it was immoral.

Ah, but was it consensual? You have sex with a girl while intentionally withholding information that would cause her to change her mind and refuse to have sex with you. And since you have infected her, you have involved her in something without her consent. She never consented to getting aids, after all.

Your brother has a gorgeous girlfriend. They're great for each other. You sleep with her, and it breaks them up. His life is now Sh**t. You've been irresponsible, so you've been immoral.

And so your brother is involved without his consent.

In both cases, wrong because people are involved in something they did not consent to. My original moral guideline applies quite well.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
But that's just silly. EVERYONE is indirectly affected by EVERYTHING we do.

No man is an island, yet we do things that "indirectly" affect everyone anyway.

That also makes it so no one can have sex, because someone will always disagree with it, which negates the entire discussion.

I disagree. How are you affected in any way when I have sex with my girlfriend?
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
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.

the problem with that is that people who have had a lot to drink will consent to anything
 

Gjallarhorn

N'yog-Sothep
I disagree. How are you affected in any way when I have sex with my girlfriend?

You having sex affects her and your mood. Your mood affects so many things, including those around you. Everything affects everything else. It's rather obvious.

And frankly, now that I know you're having sex, I am disgusted and you have ruined my evening. Therefore, you are forbidden from having sex, because it indirectly affects me.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
the problem with that is that people who have had a lot to drink will consent to anything

Then they are being influenced. It is by the same logic that it is still rape if you get a woman drunk so she'll say yes to sex.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
So perhaps there needs to be at least one rule regarding sexual matters and that is never to have sex when you've been drinking alcohol ;)

I used to have a personal rule never to have sex with a new partner when either one of us was drunk. It served me well -- preventing a lot of morning after regrets, I imagine.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Tiberious said:
Ah, but was it consensual?

Even if she consents to risk getting aids, its still irresponsible, so its immoral.

Tiberious said:
And so your brother is involved without his consent.
It still points out that simply saying "Consent makes it good" is too simple. It has to be responsible as well. Consent is part of responsibility but not all of it.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
Even if she consents to risk getting aids, its still irresponsible, so its immoral.

Stupid, yes, but not immoral.

It still points out that simply saying "Consent makes it good" is too simple. It has to be responsible as well. Consent is part of responsibility but not all of it.

Having enough responsibility to give consent certainly is part of giving consent. Didn't think I'd need to spell so much out here...
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Tiberious said:
Stupid, yes, but not immoral.
Knowingly giving someone aids is immoral, even if they consent. Besides in some systems stupid is the basis of immorality. In mine its definitely correlated.
Having enough responsibility to give consent certainly is part of giving consent. Didn't think I'd need to spell so much out here...
Language is limited, but it sounds like we agree.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
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.

I would add the word "legal" and specify for people to please not go off topic talking about things that are not "sexual acts".
 
Top