Thursday, May 28, 2009

Ethics and Homosexuality

If you aren't tired of hearing me go on about different modes of moral reasoning and their relation to debate on homosexuality hop on over to Viola's. She responded to an email I wrote her and got a conversation going. If you're inclined to comment, respect her rules, since I don't want her blaming me for sending a bunch of rabble-rousers over. :P

1 comment:

Jodie said...


That Kevin guy sure rants his homophobic head off. What was it he said of himself? "someone as narrow-minded, bigoted, and "homophobic" as I". If the shoe fits...

Adel is not much better.

Viola, well, she might mean well, but usually I am not so sure.

(I keep seeing a plastic bag over their heads, keeping fresh air out, breathing their own carbon dioxide until they turn blue)

Kattie is a hoot. Much more patient than I am, I must admit. But then Viola yells at >>her<< for not carrying on a civil conversation!!!

It's absurd!

(maybe it's because at some level she knows she is right and it bugs her)

Of course me she won't let me post even if I blew her a kiss.

Tom makes a feeble attempt to poke a hole through the plastic bag.

You, I have to say, you have led the horse to water, in my opinion. But you can't make it drink, even if to save its life. Even if the water is of the kind that if you drink it you will never thirst again.

(Ha, maybe you are leading the wrong side of the horse to water)

But this is why so many people are rejecting Christianity these days. The Fundies make so much noise that everyone else starts thinking that what they say is what the Bible says, or even what Jesus taught. And so they reject them all as being obviously deluded, uneducated, and even evil in some cases.

I think the Fundies would probably burn the Bible and crucify Jesus all over again if they thought it would preserve their doctrine.

In a way they do.

Your question about "good" is interesting. The creation story has God looking over his creation and concluding it was "good". So the text separates God from "good". It even suggests that God, in evaluating his creation, was open to the possibility that it might not have been good. So somehow, God is independent of good and evil. That which he creates can become good or evil. He can send an evil spirit to Saul. But I think he remains the ultimate judge of what is good and what is evil.

I even did this little search of good and evil and found a curious passage "'Moreover, your little ones who you said would become a prey, and your sons, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall enter there, and I will give it to them and they shall possess it." in Deut 1:39

The language is the same as in Genesis. If the sin of Adam gave him knowledge of good and evil, and a young child does not yet know good and evil, then what does that do to the doctrine of original sin?