Personal liberties vs. moral decline

Lately, in several threads, I’ve encountered the disturbing view, that allowing gay people the same rights as straight people will somehow lead to the demise of civilization and open the doors to the legalisation of paedophilia and sodomy.

I think it is due time to discuss why this view is not only wrong but also utterly absurd.
We humans have come a long way since the days of serfdom, slavery, and oppression of women and peasants.
During the 18th century people really started to discuss liberal ideas and the notion of inalienable rights of human rights, with several revolutions in the wake.
Of course the aristocracy protested loudly when male peasants were first allowed to vote and participate in deciding who should lead a country. “This will be the end of civilisation!”
When slavery was abolished the same cries were heard, not to mention the combined head-shaking and opposition when women wanted equal rights.

The idea that all humans, no matter their race, hair colour or gender, have certain rights that may NOT be violated is a grand idea. Basically our rights are there to protect us, and they do not hurt other peoples’ rights. It’s taken some time to give every one their rights, and there are places in the world where this still needs to be done… But there is such a thing as progress.
Homosexuality hurts no one. Gay marriages hurt no one. Simple as that. So giving homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals is not the demise of civilisation, it’s progress.

There is an ocean, a solar system diameter, a galactic diameter distance between this and paedophilia and sodomy.
A child has no concept of love the way adults have. Heck, our ability to really see other peoples’ points of view don not even become founded until we reach our teens. There is a reason why we reach puberty. When an adult forces himself on a child he DOES hurt some one. The child’s rights are violated. This is why paedophilia will NEVER be allowed.
The same goes for sodomy.

Your views?

So your point is gay marriage. Good, great, grand. Go for it.

Can someone arrange a few tutorials on how to use the Search Function for KMC users? Badly!

Botankus> As stated above I’ve encountered the disturbing idea, that giving homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals would somehow open the doors to legalize paedophilia and sodomy.
My point was to disprove this 🙂

No, I don't think paedophilia will ever be legal. Not sure about the other case, regardless of gay marriage or not. I don't really comment too much on this topic, but I will say it's fairly obvious that a major reason people want gay marriages legalised is for the tax benefit, in which the US refund will increase by probably 80% in their first year alone! Well, since many people reap this benefit, maybe everyone should.

I don't have a stance from the morality standpoint, just the financial one.

Is all this grand standing necessary in light of this topic having already been extensively covered in the ol' pink wedding thread?

Hmm, I also don't see the necessity of an additional thread discussing that topic or at least a topic closely related to it....

Recently, I've been thinking that the world needs to invent a new moral dilemma for people who frequent internet forums to debate. All the ones going on here have become pretty tired. Like tassels.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Recently, I've been thinking that the world needs to invent a new moral dilemma for people who frequent internet forums to debate. All the ones going on here have become pretty tired. Like tassels.

What are you talking about, Bardock?!? As if there's a choice about what side of an egg to open! Everyone knows it must be done on the left! Silly.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
What are you talking about, Bardock?!? As if there's a choice about what side of an egg to open! Everyone knows it must be done on the left! Silly.

RIGHT I SAY....and with this statement I declare war on you...

Stupid right-sided-egg-opening individuals, you're all the same.

Ya Krunk'd Floo>Yes we are...but at least we go to heaven....

Oh yeah? Ha he ha! As if that twelve footed giraffe hasn't already proved the Christian God to be a tree. You should learn to love more discriminated-against white people.

Perhaps a more general approach to the question is in order.

How much emphasis can a society put on individual rights, without equal emphasis on personal responsibilities, before moral decline commences? I mean, if "I have the right...!" to do yada yada, but I do not take responsibility for my choices and the consequences, what does that do for moral development? Since the 1960s, has there been an overemphasis on rights w/o equal weight given to personal responsibility?

My feeling: Yes.

...

I'm kinda lost on the sodomy bit. Care to clarify, Omega?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
...

I'm kinda lost on the sodomy bit. Care to clarify, Omega?

I have an idea. In Germany what we call "sodomy" is defined as sex with animals. So I suppose she meant that....being Danish and all...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
...

I'm kinda lost on the sodomy bit. Care to clarify, Omega?

So it's safe to assume she's referring to human/animal sex.

morality is defined by the good things which we choose to do and the bad things
we choose not to do. it has nothing to do with what we are forced to do and what
we are forcefully withheld from doing.

I don't think the point of the thread is gay marriage, per se. I think the point is why people like Whob can't seem to separate one sexual act from another. It's kind of like that bullshit argument that kids who smoke pot will end up hooked on heroin. The slippery slope argument. Which is, of course, bullshit.

Granted, people like Whob and Sithsabre are of the opinion that their religion gives them the high ground position to deem what is right and wrong, morally...because in these overly political times, religion and morals are inseparable to so many. These days, there seems to be a popular opinion that morals and values are the brainchild of religion.

And to address the idea of the slippery slope is that these "morals and values" have imparted the hypocritical notion that all acts against their "morals and values" are equal. To this end, raping a child is just as bad as two adults of the same sex having consensual intercourse with each other. But the question, in the mind of these people, is: what's the difference between raping a child and having gay sex? I mean they're both sins of the flesh! And the answer provided by many people is consent, or lack of physical harm, etc. But, it doesn't matter to these people if the 10 year old boy being raped by his priest has consented to it or not. It's all a threat to their worldview. They think that before christianity came along, the world was a pit of disease, filth, bestiality, and child rape, non-enlightened, darkness. And, of course, that's all part of the propaganda of organized christianity.

And what about the people who profess this point of view who aren't religious? Well, rather than a threat to their worldview, it seems to present a threat to their idea of masculinity. The world is black and white, and apparently perpetually trapped in 1950 Nebraska. Men are beer drinking, car-obsessed, woman-disrespecting, female objectifying chauvinists. Women are dim-witted, man-fearing, sex-fearing, homebodies who are really just meant to bear children and please the man. And, maybe in many cases, these people cast society in these strict molds because they fear their own repressed feelings towards others of the same sex. I can't really speak to that. I'm sure some people do redirect, but I think the majority are just acting out of fear for something they can't understand.

Long story short, gay marriage is not threat to the religion of someone that is secure in that religion. And, gay marriage is no threat to the masculinity or femininity of a person who is secure in those aspects of their personality.

Sodomy = Moral.