The Social Effects of Sin in America

As I am arguing on the affirmative it would generally be agreed that I have the burden of proof. As such I will start my argument right away and reserve the last round for summary and conclusion, not adding any new arguments at that time.I am afraid I must disagree with the second of Con's guidelines. While this is not a debate as to the existence of God, sin is not general malfeasance, it is specifically transgression of God's law or more broadly in my own Catholic faith anything that tends to separate man from God. Any discussion of sin must take into account this aspect, otherwise it would be a discussion of crime or immoral behavior generally and would not need to use such religious terms as "sin". Any argument about the social or personal effects of sin cannot avoid taking for granted the existence of God as the source of objective morality; the standard against which moral behavior must be judged. The premise itself takes sin for granted and simply seeks to surmise whether or not this has an effect on society. Let us start with some of the statements made by my partner in this debate and then move on to the premise I will be defending in this debate.Sin has, from this religious standpoint an objective and subjective dimension. Something can be objectively sinful, and, due to ignorance, a person could not be culpable of engaging in that action. The person must be actively trying to correctly form his conscience, but the matter remains that those two dimensions exist. For mortal sin to exist in Catholic theology for instance there must be grave matter (something must be very wrong) full knowledge (the person must know this is wrong) and full consent of the will (I choose freely to do so anyways).1. Humans do not commit "sin", but rather make mistakes and bad choices The rationale given to support this assertion is that there is little or no evidence that homosexuality of converting from one religion to another is immoral. Were this true it would call into question whether or not homosexuality and converting to another faith are sins, not whether or not sin exists. In any case there is indeed a reason to consider both of these sins.Homosexuality. Sex is ordered towards the unitive and procreative capacities which lead to the formation of strong families and aid in raising healthy children. That is, sex draws a couple closer together in their commitment to one another and has the potential to create new life which this closely bound couple can then properly raise. To remove sexuality from this context goes against its true meaning and is therefore considered to be sinful. Homosexuality is such a case. You may disagree with it, you may argue with it, but it is not base assertion, but a reasoned position.Apostasy: Conversion in and of itself is not considered by any religion to be immoral. It is in fact considered to be the highest virtue when a person converts to the religion regarded as true. You call it conversion when someone changes to the true religion and apostasy when one changes from the true religion to a false one. This is also sinful in that it quite literally separates a person from the path revealed by God to draw people nearer to him, a sin against Truth. Once again, one may agree or disagree, but there is definitely reasoning behind it.2. "Judgmental" God and societyThe argument seems to be that people refrain from sinning because they are afraid of being judged by their peers or their God (in the first case facing ostracism and in the second eternal damnation). This may or may not be their true motivation, I cannot know. In any case it is irrelevant to the case at hand, which is whether or not it affects society.Truth MattersA society where people strive for truth and virtue is a better society. I do not mean that all men are virtuous in said society, or even that most men are virtuous; but if a determining number of that society actively seek out truth and attempt to live virtuously society will be better for it. Some people may be wrong about what constitutes sin and what doesn't, but this attempt to live virtuously (and at least avoiding sin in the subjective sense) will lead to a healthier society in that the person seeks the good of the community and his fellow man rather than his own good.In the objective sense truth also matters. If it is true that homosexuality is a sin, then the promotion of that sin is contrary to the greater good of that society and this is detrimental to it. If it is true that homosexuality is not a sin, then to limit the expression of homosexuality or attempt to curtail what is billed as "gay rights" would be a sin and detrimental to society. Sin may be subjective in one sense, but truth does matter, and a society which does not turn its back on truth but lives according to it will be better off.