X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 09:54:00 EDT
From:         rf35 <Richard_A_FYFE@UMAIL.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Is homosexuality immoral?
Comments: To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu>

Greetings:  To Jason

>> From: "Patrick W. Hamlett" <PWHMDS@NCSUVM.BITNET>
>
>> This is true *only* if a reasonable case that homosexuality
>> is immoral can be made, a feat *no one* on this list has yet
>> achieved...


> I think I missed something.  Do the pro-gay people out there
> not believe that the Bible is a "reasonable" guide to morality?

        Yes; particularly given the request for a "reasonable"
case to be made, and the fact that those who have made appeals
to the Bible have also been those who condemned the use of
reason (logical discourse and all of that).  An appeal to reason
would be a necessary part of an appropriate answer to the
challenge.

> If so, this discussion is already over.  My moral code is
> certainly no worse than yours just because mine is based in
> religion.

        True: that one's moral code is based on religion is not
sufficient to consider it defective.  But people who have opposed
such religious-based claims have given reasons against such an
appeal.  A reasonable defense of these claims tends to be non-
existent.  I know that my attempts to reasonably discuss such
issues with these people eventually end when these people cease
responding to my objections.

> In fact, mine is infinitely better, since it is based upon
> eternal truths as opposed to mere human whims.

        Why are eternal truths "better" than human whims?  Is
this not a value judgment?  Does not the truth of this claim
DEPEND upon what theory of value is true?

> By excluding Christianity as a "reasonable" moral code,
> you've constructed a playing field that allows only you to
> win.

        By insisting that (some specific interpretation of)
Christianity must necessarily be reasonable, you've constructed
a playing field that allows only you to win.

> Quit hiding behind your atheism and grant that not everyone
> shares your peculiar view of morality.

        I grant that not everybody has the same beliefs about
morality as I do.  I also grant that not everybody has the same
beliefs that I do concerning the existence of dinosaurs.  I do
not grant that "dinosaurs did exist" is true for those people
who believe it is true, and "dinosaurs did not exist" is false
for those who disbelieve it.  For this would imply that "dino
saures did exist and they did not exist," which of course is
absurd.  I hold that the same absurdity exists with respect to
"homosexuality is immoral and it is not immoral."  It must be
one or the other, not both.


> If you want to seriously debate this topic, you have to
> grant enough to arive at SOME common ground.

        I grant that the first person who flinches in being
able to provide a reason for their judgment sacrifices any
right to claim that their judgment is reasonable.


>Jason

                                      Richard A. Fyfe
                                      rf35@umail.umd.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU