Two questions that will make social conservatives think....

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:11 pm

by the way Asbestosman,

This thread has made me think more than I've thought in quite a long time. Thanks. Seriously dawg.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:11 pm

Bond...James Bond wrote:
asbestosman wrote:Would you also give all your worldly goods away to help ease societal ills?

Uh no....seems like more of a sacrifice to make onesself poor (which is a much more static position) than a one time sexual encounter.

I think the difference between you and those Bill Maher asked his question to is that you merely find homosexual encounters to be personally disguisting. They find it to be immoral.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:13 pm

Bond...James Bond wrote:No....I'd only give up my free agency to some situations. I wouldn't take away others.

So you 'd be ok with torturing a loved one if they were willing and if it would stop terrorist attacks? I don't think I'd have the guts. The first scream of pain or fear would render me immobile--even over many other voices screaming in terror from terrorists.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:18 pm

asbestosman wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote:No....I'd only give up my free agency to some situations. I wouldn't take away others.

So you 'd be ok with torturing a loved one if they were willing and if it would stop terrorist attacks? I don't think I'd have the guts. The first scream of pain or fear would render me immobile--even over many other voices screaming in terror from terrorists.

Argh....twisting the dagger are we?

Alright let's assume I could save 1000 people's lives by torturing a loved one who agrees to it (there's a mouth full....only on Mormon Discussions right?):

Will my family member be maimed for life (loss of limb, mutulation)?

Will they be killed?

Which family member/which sex (grandmother's and mothers are different from brothers)?

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:20 pm

asbestosman wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote:
asbestosman wrote:Would you also give all your worldly goods away to help ease societal ills?

Uh no....seems like more of a sacrifice to make onesself poor (which is a much more static position) than a one time sexual encounter.

I think the difference between you and those Bill Maher asked his question to is that you merely find homosexual encounters to be personally disguisting. They find it to be immoral.

What about my personal disgust is trumped by something being moral or immoral?

(Edits...I can't type at all)

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:21 pm

Scottie wrote:I've asked similar questions to this. Such as, would you give up hot showers if it meant that we could get simple vaccinations to 3rd world countries? Or, would you record yourself having lesbian sex and post it for everyone on MDB to see if it meant we would enjoy it??

Tough questions, huh??

Entertainment at my expense hardly seems like the betterment of society. The vaccinations question is interesting. I have no easy answer, but in general I am disinclined to completely give up anything. I might be willing to partially give up some conveniences for the betterment of society. Maybe I'll take shorter showers or shower with slightly less hot water.

I'm not one to believe that giving up my life savings will really do that much to ease societal ills. In fact I suspect it may compund them because then I'd become more dependant on government doles for retirement, etc.

Post by **_barrelomonkeys** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:24 pm

Little torture? Or BIG torture?

Most of us have our infants get shots (some of which are incredibly painful) that DO ensure many lives are saved. It's hard as a mother to watch your infant screaming, balled up, fists clenched, red faced, tears streaming while we whisper soothingly in their ear knowing it's the best for them and society. We do it.

Uhh.. something about men.......

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:25 pm

Bond...James Bond wrote:What about my personal disgust is trumped by something be moral or immoral?

I'm not sure if it's a question of superiority. Let's put it this way though. I'd be perfectly willing to eat a mayonaise sandwich to prevent terrorist attacks. I find that to be about the most disguisting thing imaginable. However, eating mayonaise is not seen as immoral to me despite my personal hatred of the stuff.

I think even for you though, what you view as immoral does Trump personal disguist. Hence your refusal to violate another's agency to prevent terrorist attacks.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:26 pm

barrelomonkeys wrote:You men need to get some balls.

Probably true....for me anyways. :(

Post by **_Scottie** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:27 pm

asbestosman wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote:What about my personal disgust is trumped by something be moral or immoral?

I'm not sure if it's a question of superiority. Let's put it this way though. I'd be perfectly willing to eat a mayonaise sandwich to prevent terrorist attacks. I find that to be about the most disguisting thing imaginable. However, eating mayonaise is not seen as immoral to me despite my personal hatred of the stuff.

I think even for you though, what you view as immoral does Trump personal disguist. Hence your refusal to violate another's agency to prevent terrorist attacks.

So the root of the question is more like asking if you would be willing to incite God's wrath against you by doing something He considers vile and immoral in order to save lives?