Why should Immoral people change?

logical7

Just because two people consent to do a 'thing' does not make it ok especially when they are a part of society. It would be like two gears in a mechanical clock deciding to 'swing the other way' and then expect the clock to work correctly.

People are not cogs in a machine, or ants in a colony, but intelligent social individuals. There are trade-offs to be made in all aspects of life. It can hardly be surprising that balancing social and individual concerns would be one of the aspects.

Fortunately, human society is not some fixed arrangement imposed by outside design or undirected evolutionary circumstance, like a clock or an ant colony. Human beings can shape their societies intentionally, just as human beings can shape themselves intentionally.

For example, suppose two men love each other, and want to have sex together. Either their society will collapse if they do, or their society will persist anyway. If their society won't collapse, then yes, why shouldn't their love for each other find its natural expression?

If their society is threatened by their choice, then what else is true of this society which, if it allows its members to fulfill their natural, peaceful and ordinary human longings, it collapses? Such a brittle social structure is unlikely to endure and thrive anyway, and certainly not in competition with other societies that better harness the potential contributions of all their members.

Fortunately, even a backward society has members who are human beings who would be aware of the problem, not ants or gears. Human beings can diagnose brittleness and fix it. If they cannot, then perhaps it is not such a bad thing that such a society should accept its fate, since it fails to acomplish what other societies have done routinely without any problem whatsoever. Perhaps it should give way to something that works.

Of course, even dysfunctional socities can persist for a while. Human beings can be neutralized. They can be convinced, especially when force and threats are used, to think that social structure is something imposed from outside, and that rather than solve their social problems, they ought to spend lots of their time grovelling in the dirt. This can even work out well for the few, the self-appointed agents of the pretended "external" authority, but poorly for everybody else.

reply to post by eight bits

People are not cogs in a machine, or ants in a colony, but intelligent social individuals.

"Intelligent" and "social" are very basic traits of humans... but it wouldn't always work on a social level, where individuals are required to be co-operative in order for society to function properly. For example, sociopaths and criminals can also be intelligent and social... yet their greed and lust has an effect on society as a whole... which is a point made in the OP.

The most basic level of human nature pertains to physical needs such as the need to eat, sleep, sex etc.

On a higher level, these basic needs are carried out bearing in mind the rights and well being of other humans.
Examples : You might be hungry, but you would NOT eat somebody else's lunch. You might feel like having sex, but you would NOT force somebody to have sex with you.

On an even higher level, these same basic needs can also be carried out while being mindful of God.
Example : A religious person would eat after giving a prayer of thanks to God.
A religious person would recognize that same sex relationships or even certain kinds of sex are sins.

For example, suppose two men love each other, and want to have sex together. Either their society will collapse if they do, or their society will persist anyway. If their society won't collapse, then yes, why shouldn't their love for each other find its natural expression?

Your'e right, homosexuality will not cause society to collapse in the literal sense of the word. However, the practice causes society to collapse on a (religious) and moral level.

A society that is mindful of God would be automatically conscious of their moral atmosphere and therefore would not allow for it, even though it does not interfere with the everyday functioning of society.

but it wouldn't always work on a social level, where individuals are required to be co-operative in order for society to function properly.

Of course it doesn't always work. People are fallible. Plus, not all socieies "should" survive. I think we are all better off that the Western Roman Empire was replaced, for example.

The question is whether people are capable of managing their own affiars, and compared with whom, who would mange those affairs instead. Some people develop an approach to life, and by whatever means, persuade others to adopt their ways. That's how it has always been.

Chief among the variables has been the means of persuasion. Fairy tales backed up by threats of violence, possibly covered over with a velvet glove, have long been a very popular choice of means. Fairly recently, the West has chosen another approach. So far, so good.

Example : A religious person would eat after giving a prayer of thanks to God.
A religious person would recognize that same sex relationships or even certain kinds of sex are sins.

Religious? There are plenty of religious people who respect all the natural, private and peaceful activities of their neighbors.

A society that is mindful of God would be automatically conscious of their moral atmosphere and therefore would not allow for it, even though it does not interfere with the everyday functioning of society.

If that were true, then it would be compelling argument for telling your God to take a flying leap. However, there is some reason to doubt that you speak for any actual God. There are other devotes of God who couldn't care less about other people's natural and peaceful pursuits.

I have the suspicion that God may be being unfairly blamed for somebody else's bigotry.

reply to post by eight bits

Religious? There are plenty of religious people who respect all the natural, private and peaceful activities of their neighbors.

Sure there are.
But it would mean they are living in a contradiction. Their acceptance of homosexuality is a compromise on their religion...so they make room for secular ideas. It would stem from some need to "fit in" to the secular world. Either way, it has no basis in their religions which condemns the practice.

There are other devotes of God who couldn't care less about other people's natural and peaceful pursuits.

Read above.

If that were true, then it would be compelling argument for telling your God to take a flying leap. However, there is some reason to doubt that you speak for any actual God.

Like it or not, their religiousness IS why Jewish, Christian or Muslim societies have a zero tolerance policy towards homosexuality or whatever else challenges their religious morals. As for the second part of that quote, would you like me to quote Leviticus 18:22?

Of course, Christian societies especially in the west...exist under a largely secular framework. Which is why Christians are adapting to secular ideals, that accept homosexuality as a normal lifestyle. Which is why we have churches holding gay weddings. They are looking for loopholes in their bibles so as to be able to somehow fit in with a secular ideal.

I have the suspicion that God may be being unfairly blamed for somebody else's bigotry.

Leviticus 18:22

reply to post by eight bits

People are not cogs in a machine, or ants in a colony, but intelligent social individuals.

they are as long as they choose to be a part of the society. They have to respect the social limits of behaviour even if they are naturally able to go beyond those limits. The social benefits and protection are a trade off for limiting 'natural' urges.
Its like a inversely proportional 'see saw', if individuals exercise natural desires too freely then the society gets less harmonious(requiring more policing) and if the individuals exercise them more responsibly then the society is more cohesive.
I am not limiting it to homosexuality, it applies equally to heterosexual urges, greed etc.

If their society is threatened by their
choice, then what else is true of this
society which, if it allows its members
to fulfill their natural, peaceful and
ordinary human longings, it collapses?

its basic biology, if majority males in a herd of animals start mounting males instead of females, that heard will get extinct soon.
If we look at humans, say in USA there are 1 in 10 with homosexual inclinations and 1 in 20 who identify themselves as 'gay'.
Now female total population is naturally bit more than males and gays and lesbians are not equally found, so every man going gay leaves a straight woman partnerless and she has to lower her expectations and agree to be a mistress or worst a prostitute which itself destroys families, kids growing in broken families tend to be more insecure,violent and in identity crisis and the domino effects continue on..
So yes an increasingly homosexual society will ultimately collapse or decay so much that peaceful, family loving, straight familiès will have to migrate.

reply to post by eight bits

Of course, even dysfunctional socities can persist for a while. Human beings can be neutralized. They can be convinced, especially when force and threats are used, to think that social structure is something imposed from outside, and that rather than solve their social problems, they ought to spend lots of their time grovelling in the dirt. This can even work out well for the few, the self-appointed agents of the pretended "external" authority, but poorly for everybody else.

your views and about what society they are, is very clear.
However your style just shows what you are rather than anything about the society you are talking about.

You don't like yourself or your 'disbelief' to be critcized yet you can't help yourself to repeat the same behaviour towards others.

The societies that believe they exist without an 'external' cause are insulting and contradicting their own intelligence. They roam about choosing 'ways of life' that appear appealing only to find that they don't work and continue grovelling at the doors of anyone who appears successful, chasing illusions till the reality of 'death' hits them. Then they seriously hope that there in nothing on the other side but what if there is??

logical7

I think your affirmation that some human beings are ants or gears speaks for itself, and I'll just leave it there. As for your other post,

You don't like yourself or your 'disbelief' to be critcized yet you can't help yourself to repeat the same behaviour towards others.

Could you please point out where, in what I posted and you quoted, your religion is mentioned, much less criticized? Please be specific. Thank you in advance.

Then they seriously hope that there in nothing on the other side but what if there is??

If so, then I would assume that since God made homosexuals and heterosexuals alike, then he would welcome all his creatures home, gay and straight, just as it pleased him to make them. To assume anything else would, I think, be that criticism of theism which you are baiting me for here.

Scorpie

But it would mean they are living in a contradiction.

My guess is that they can live with contradicting your religion. Their religion prompts them to accept things that yours doesn't. Eating pork, for instance. Same thing, same source and level of "moral concern," same disagreement over whether God could care less.

Which is why Christians are adapting to secular ideals, that accept homosexuality as a normal lifestyle.

Or, alternatively, they recognize that it is a normal and healthy lifestyle, just because that's the truth of the matter. I've also been told that many Christians, just like many Jews, are reluctant on religious grounds to bear false witness against their neighbors. Perhaps this explains the truth-telling that you've observed.

reply to post by eight bits

I think your affirmation that some human beings are ants or gears speaks for itself, and I'll just leave it there.

it is that way, its also the same if you worship science. You were pre-determined and whatever you say and do also, everything is following precise mathametical rules, every impulse your neurons fire has a pre-cause and so on..
The intellectual independence you are defending is an illusion. You are reacting to a complex soup of stimuli in a pattern that is determined by your past experience of stimuli.

Could you please point out where, in
what I posted and you quoted, your
religion is mentioned, much less
criticized? Please be specific. Thank
you in advance.

Why you think that i meant my religion??
You criticized the idea of God and prophets and society based on it.
I am not going to play along and bait you more, just avoid what you very well know that you should avoid.

If so, then I would assume that since
God made homosexuals and
heterosexuals alike, then he would
welcome all his creatures home, gay
and straight, just as it pleased him to
make them. To assume anything else would, I think, be that criticism of
theism which you are baiting me for
here.

you cannot start with an assumption, present it as a fact and build a whole arguement on it.
Did God made all other sexual deviants too, necrophiles, pedophiles etc?
God gave humans an animal nature and a higher spiritual nature and a brain to understand and choose. Choosing animal nature and holding God responsible is a testimony to the fact that the brain has become a servant of the animal nature! Animals don't take personal responsibility, humans should.

logical7

Why you think that i meant my religion??
You criticized the idea of God and prophets and society based on it.
I am not going to play along and bait you more, just avoid what you very well know that you should avoid.

It would seem that if I had discussed God or any prophet in the passage you quoted with distate, then it would have been easy enough for you to point out where I did so. But you can't, because I didn't talk about those things.

I didn't mention your religion at all. You fibbed that I did, because you needed a pretext to comment, yet again when it has no relevance to the topic, about my religion, that I am not a believer.

Shame on you.

you cannot start with an assumption, present it as a fact and build a whole arguement on it.

You asked me a question,

Then they seriously hope that there in nothing on the other side but what if there is??

Which I answered straightforwardly. If you don't like my answer, then that's too bad.
-

reply to post by logical7

reading your opinions about islam i feel you barely know it.

You still have failed to address how the 'peaceful and educated' Muslims are working to restrain the militants that are causing havoc all over the Middle East, in Boston, etc.

Fine. You say Islam is peaceful. PLEASE will you tell us how you peaceful, educated Muslims are working to STOP the atrocities that the "Islamist Extremists" are perpetrating?

I've already said that those are the people who are causing "disparaging aspersions" of Islam. I've said that their actions are the REASON that Islam is 'disparaged.' You have failed to answer what you (and your educated co-Muslims) are doing to STOP THEM.

Stop.
Them.

Do you really not get this? WW3 has just begun. ...... Israel vs Syria - and all of the Middle East -- killing and unrest is escalating. Stop telling me those are the "ignorant masses", and tell me what the peaceful Muslims are doing to STOP IT. Please.

I know you are in India. Please explain to me how this murderous lawlessness is still happening EVERY BLOODY DAY, with no apparent "response" from the Muslim peaceful people about how they "regret the actions of these (thousands upon thousands of) violent Islamists." Why are the leaders of your peaceful Islam not coming forward and saying they "condemn their actions"?

reply to post by logical7

so every man going gay leaves a straight woman partnerless and she has to lower her expectations and agree to be a mistress or worst a prostitute which itself destroys families,

Every man "going gay"? REALLY?
Straight women become "partnerless", and thus become prostitutes???

This makes no sense at all. None.

You know what, log7? As much as I have appreciated our dialogue, I really think we're at an insurmountable impasse in terms of 'religious dialogue.'
I will never, ever agree that Islam is "the true religion", or that the Qur'an and Sharia are correct.
I regret having to say that, but as "good of a teacher" as you may be, I am utterly unconvinced that your religion is "correct."

Having said that, I wish you well in your upcoming 'family-starting' of marrying a Christian/Western girl.

reply to post by logical7

You don't like yourself or your 'disbelief' to be critcized yet you can't help yourself to repeat the same behaviour towards others.

The societies that believe they exist without an 'external' cause are insulting and contradicting their own intelligence. They roam about choosing 'ways of life' that appear appealing only to find that they don't work and continue grovelling at the doors of anyone who appears successful, chasing illusions till the reality of 'death' hits them

Dude.
Friend!
You would do well to STOP analyzing other people. You are what, 25? You told me you had no 'first-hand' experience with 'Westerners.' You think you are oh so wise and such a good teacher - but you show in your posts how much you DO NOT know about the world.

I wish you no harm, or ill, but you are out of your depth at this point.

I understand your motives, and I think I understand your 'moral system', but the fact remains that Religion Does Not Cause Morality. No amount of you saying "Islam instills morals" is going to fly here.

I admire your devotion, but I cannot acknowledge your limited view.
Unicorn ponies for everyone!
~wild

reply to post by wildtimes

You still have failed to address how the 'peaceful and educated' Muslims are working to restrain the militants that are causing havoc all over the Middle East, in Boston, etc.

Well, what are the "peaceful", "educated" and "civilized" western people doing to restrain its war mongering governments... that are causing havoc in the middle east and asia?

Stop pointing fingers at Muslims until you have found a way to reign in your own warmongers.

Fine. You say Islam is peaceful. PLEASE will you tell us how you peaceful, educated Muslims are working to STOP the atrocities that the "Islamist Extremists" are perpetrating?

Read above.

Why are the leaders of your peaceful Islam not coming forward and saying they "condemn their actions"?

Where is YOUR apology for all the wars and bloodshed caused by YOUR government? When have you condemned the actions of your government?

Do you also expect Christians to come forward and say they condemn the actions of pedophile priests?
Do you also expect regular American folks to come forward and say they condemn the action of their bloodthirsty governments?

Tell me why a muslim should believe a westerner when he says the west is somehow more peaceful?
The truth is that the west is an order of magnitude higher than the rest of the world when it comes to violence and atrocities. Or are you going to deny all the wars and atrocities perpetrated by the west?

reply to post by eight bits

Or, alternatively, they recognize that it is a normal and healthy lifestyle, just because that's the truth of the matter.

Well, is it a biblical truth? Is there a verse to support that statement?
Or is this one of those threads where you don't have your "cultural christian" cap on?

My guess is that they can live with contradicting your religion.

Clearly they are living in contradiction to their religion.

reply to post by eight bits

It would seem that if I had discussed God or any prophet in the passage you quoted with distate, then it would have been easy enough for you to point out where I did so. But you can't, because I didn't talk about those things. I didn't mention your religion at all. You fibbed that I did, because you needed a pretext to comment, yet again when it has no relevance to the topic, about my religion, that I am not a believer. Shame on you.

oh yes, shame on me. Now drop it. Just remember not to repeat what you did or i'l have to hurt your delicate heart again!

Which I answered straightforwardly. If
you don't like my answer, then that's
too bad.

your answer is based on assumptions to just defend your position, and you don't admit that its assumption. Its just sad.

reply to post by eight bits

Or, alternatively, they recognize that it is a normal and healthy lifestyle, just because that's the truth of the matter.

HEALTHY!!! NORMAL!!, that the TRUTH!!!
i hope you are still talking about homosexuality.
Its not normal to do the acts they do and definitely not healthy. You see the 'normal' place thats meant for that act has been made to produce natural lubrication and allows a healthy act.
The acts they do increase the risk of AIDS etc too high as compared to the really 'normal' act and damage to health like, fissures, rectal prolapses etc
so you can use the words normal, healthy, truth as much as you like, but they don't become true.
They do it because they want to, just like people eat pork because they want to, wear your cultural christian cap(thanx Sc0rpie for the term) and accept that its not allowed by Christianity but christians have sarificed a lot of their laws on the altar of secularism.
Hope you wouldn't want me to explain how 'healthy' pork is when it needs to be irradiated to increase its shelf life.

reply to post by wildtimes

You still have failed to address how the 'peaceful and educated' Muslims are working to restrain the militants that are causing havoc all over the Middle East, in Boston, etc.

let me first clear that 'peaceful and educated' does not equate to 'pro-western ideas/policies'.
Its not militants that are causing havoc, its the proxy war mongers that handed weapons to discontent people to further their agenda of removing any power that can oppose israel in the region.

I did answer how it can stop, if all muslims follow Islam more,

3:103. And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allah (i.e. this Qur'an),
and be not divided among yourselves,
and remember Allah's Favour on you,
for you were enemies one to another
but He joined your hearts together, so
that, by His Grace, you became brethren (in Islamic Faith), and you
were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and
He saved you from it. Thus Allah
makes His Ayat (proofs, evidences,
verses, lessons, signs, revelations,
etc.,) clear to you, that you may be guided.

The West has manipulated using the divide and conquer policy from a long time,
they made false promise of independence to arabs and gave them guns(when they had already planned how to divide arab territory among themselves) to bring down Ottoman Empire in WWI, they ruled India by dividing Hindus and Muslims causing bloody riots and hatred that still affects India.
I don't know what they have promised to saudi arabia, turkey and some UAE countries in return for their help to bring down anti-israel countries.
The problem is that you oversimplify observations and conclusions wildtimes. Its naive to just demand "what muslims are doing?!!" who do you think is suffering the most due to the situation in middle east?
It seems you are lashing back just for the sake of a response because you don't like what i say.
I love to discuss with you and i hope it continues.

reply to post by wildtimes

Every man "going gay"? REALLY? Straight women become "partnerless", and thus become prostitutes??? This makes no sense at all. None.

really?

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

158.3 million

The number of females in the United
States in 2011. The number of males
was 153.3 million.

5 million more women. Even if say 2 million are in reproductive age group, how would they find a partner even without including the factor of gays into account?

There are about 1 million prostitutes in USA.

With no education/job and no man/family to support them, where do you think they will be forced to go to provide for themselves?

The rate of a bj has gone down from 20-30$ to 2-3$!!
Who do you think can do that unless desperate to survive.

The age of girls entering prostitution is as low as 12 years

more than 50% men have been to a prostitute

You still think your society is not decaying?

You know what, log7? As much as I
have appreciated our dialogue, I really
think we're at an insurmountable
impasse in terms of 'religious
dialogue.'
I will never, ever agree that Islam is "the true religion", or that the Qur'an
and Sharia are correct.
I regret having to say that, but as
"good of a teacher" as you may be, I
am utterly unconvinced that your religion is "correct."

maybe not yet
either Islam is not correct or what you have been believing till now is not correct or both are partially not correct. Whatever the case you are oblidged by your own intellect to find out. There is going to be a Judgement Day and everyone will be judged by their sincerity. Even if you don't believe it, you can't help but agree that sincere seeking is the only right way. You are free to stop but i'l like you to question yourself why you will do it.
'Because my 'opinions' offend your 'facts'!!?
Have i been rude to you? a bit annoying on purpose for sure

I wish you well in
your upcoming 'family-starting' of
marrying a Christian/Western girl.

thanks

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

You don't like yourself or your 'disbelief' to be critcized yet you can't help yourself to repeat the same behaviour towards others.

The societies that believe they exist without an 'external' cause are insulting and contradicting their own intelligence. They roam about choosing 'ways of life' that appear appealing only to find that they don't work and continue grovelling at the doors of anyone who appears successful, chasing illusions till the reality of 'death' hits them

Dude.
Friend!
You would do well to STOP analyzing other people. You are what, 25? You told me you had no 'first-hand' experience with 'Westerners.' You think you are oh so wise and such a good teacher - but you show in your posts how much you DO NOT know about the world.

I wish you no harm, or ill, but you are out of your depth at this point.

I understand your motives, and I think I understand your 'moral system', but the fact remains that Religion Does Not Cause Morality. No amount of you saying "Islam instills morals" is going to fly here.

I admire your devotion, but I cannot acknowledge your limited view.
Unicorn ponies for everyone!

~wild

I think you are judging me by my reply to a specific poster.
Thats not my understanding. It just a reply in a similar style that had offended me. Don't judge me from what i say when i am pissed at some sneeky remark. I am aware of my limited knowledge and trying to increase it.

I am here to speak my mind, not to seek approval of my beliefs or convince anyone to follow them, if my belief appeals to someone then its their choice what to do about it.

What flies here will be decided by the superiority of the ideas, till now it just was what the majority wanted to fly.

Scorpie

Well, is it a biblical truth?

The only Biblical truth on point is that a Bronze Age Israelite state forbade some kinds of adult consensual expression of human love within its borders. The same state forbade the eating of pork and shell fish, the wearing of clothing with more than one kind of material, gathering sticks on the sabbath, and many. many other "moral" lapses.

Christianity and much of living Judaism understand that eating pork or shellfish presents no moral issue. Adultery and murder, also forbidden in the statutes, do present such issues. It follows that God expects living readers of the ancient statutes to use their intelligence to decide what of the Bronze Age rules reflect enduring problems of ethics and morality, and which are, for whatever reason, peculiar to the time, place and circumstances.

Clearly they are living in contradiction to their religion.

You and I have had this discussion repeatedly, and in a variety of contexts. You can preach what you think somebody else's religion should be, but you have no basis to pontificate about what anybody else's religion is.

The majority of Christians who revere the Tanakh do not believe that it should be read in the way you propose that they should read it. Thus, their reading is consistent with their own religion, and contradictory to yours.

logical7

oh yes, shame on me. Now drop it. Just remember not to repeat what you did or i'l have to hurt your delicate heart again!

You trash talk my religion on every thread where we both participate. In this thread, you've made up some BS that this remark of mine

Of course, even dysfunctional socities can persist for a while. Human beings can be neutralized. They can be convinced, especially when force and threats are used, to think that social structure is something imposed from outside, and that rather than solve their social problems, they ought to spend lots of their time grovelling in the dirt. This can even work out well for the few, the self-appointed agents of the pretended "external" authority, but poorly for everybody else.

refers to your religion, by way of its references to God, prophets and societies based on those. Putting aside that your religion is hardly distinguished from others in having gods, prophets or societies, when I asked you to back up your claim, and point out where God or prophets are mentioned there, you can't.

You can't because it isn't there and you made it up as a pretext to bad-mouth my religion. Again. And when I called you out for it, you tell me to shut up or you'll do it some more.

Empty threat, big guy. You'll do it again anyway. Dissing other people and their personal affairs, whether it's their relgion or whom they love, is all you've got.
-