|
In Reply to: I have trouble with such (non-)values posted by Moralizer on April 16, 2006 at 22:23:01:
I enjoyed your comments and think you are right about much of it. Also correct is your observation about my not taking sides, is that important to you? Like I said, to me it is a matter of trust: TO ME!
Fidelity, sex and trust are related to each other. There is also morality, which have normative prescriptions, some to protect individuals and some to protect society at large. There are all types of morality, some work well for the individual others work well for society, and others don't work well for anybody. I am glad I didn't come through as somebody pushing my moral views on others, that would have been sort of inmoral to me.
As individuals we should support each other but as members of society we should keep an eye on the implications that our actions have on society at large. In my view society and community can call the shots for morality, including sexual behavior. But also individuals have an absolute right and power to make fools of themselves and adopt any moral code or set of norms that prescribe their behavior AS LONG AS they don't infringe the rights of others to do the same. That includes their spose, children, themselves, the other party, etc.
Love vs. Law was an aberration of this simple natural law of respect for each other's space. It presented it under the guise of love in fact turning things inside out and upside down to redefine lack of respect and calling it love.
As far as just having sex for the heck of it, I don't judge it. This is to respect adults to make their own decision AS LONG AS they are not stepping on somebody else's space.
I think we are getting this thing more beat up than carne enpanisade. I'm going to break my fast now.
