peacesamuel94:





Hope you know that humans are also very selfish in nature, and hence can LIE consequently to satisfy their interest if it gets to that point..

I think this pattern of reasoning is flawed, if we were to succumb to all our feelings because its in our nature, then there will be no atom of difference between a man and an animal.

Very good observation!

AgentOfAllah:

Great question! I actually believe the institution of marriage is inherently dumb, and I'd rather it didn't exist. But it does exist, and provides certain legal protections for all parties involved. If someone will bear kids for me, then I'm prepared to relinquish parts of my principles to afford her such legal protections.

So procreation is dumb? Being devoted to each other sexually is dumb? So it's all about the legal framework for you.

So you simply see it all as a forced union or something forced on you so just have to mechanically follow? Is this what you are insinuating ?

dalaman:


You deliberately want to keep misunderstanding my position.

The act itself is wrong and I've stated why it is wrong.

I am not Agentofallah.

You focused on the agreement and not the act. To you it's the agreement or breaking the agreement that makes it wrong but the act itself without any agreements isn't wrong. This is what you are insinuating.

peacesamuel94:


Hope you know that humans are also very selfish in nature, and hence can LIE consequently to satisfy their interest if it gets to that point..

Yes I do. The crux of the matter is self-interest, like you mentioned. So if you allow people to pursue their interests, as long as it does not harm anybody, they'll have no need to lie.

I think this pattern of reasoning is flawed, if we were to succumb to all our feelings because its in our nature, then there will be no atom of difference between a man and an animal.

Nor should there be! Humans are most assuredly animals...pretentious, but animals no less!

butterflyl1on:


So procreation is dumb? Being devoted to each other sexually is dumb? So it's all about the legal framework for you.

Procreation isn't dumb, it's natural...almost like eating. It can, and frequently does happen outside of the institution of marriage. But yes, sexual devotion is dumb and pretentious!

So you simply see it all as a forced union or something forced on you so just have to mechanically follow? Is this what you are insinuating ?

Union isn't forced, social expectations are! I don't need marriage to do right by the people I love, but if I died, the legal framework of marriage will protect them and their inheritance from the prying eyes of predators.

AgentOfAllah:

Yes I do. The crux of the matter is self-interest, like you mentioned. So if you allow people to pursue their interests, as long as it does not harm anybody, they'll have no need to lie.


Nor should there be! Humans are most assuredly animals...pretentious, but animals no less!

Who decides what animals are and what humans are?

You say we are animals so based on this notion you believe that acting like animals in the form of consensual fornication and adultery is perfectly alright. However, do animals give consent? If the barbaric nature of an animal is to take by force or cunning what is not his and still feel good about it how then do you talk about consent? As animals whom you say we are then it shouldn't matter to you if consent is given/gotten or not.

I say we are not animals. Anyway let me now derail

AgentOfAllah:

Procreation isn't dumb, it's natural...almost like eating. It can, and frequently does happen outside of the institution of marriage. But yes, sexual devotion is dumb and pretentious!


Union isn't forced, social expectations are! I don't need marriage to do right by the people I love, but if I died, the legal framework of marriage will protect them and their inheritance from the prying eyes of predators.

You can have the same legal framework protect them even without marriage.

Since you say sexual devotion is dumb are you an advocate of polygamy or polyandry or both?

Tearless: Man has the luxury of sampling as many puzzays as possible while not yet committed. The moment you enter into an emotional contract, you've got obligations and stictly defined bounderies and restrictions and must adhere to them with the last drop of blood in your vein. Marriage is not a must, it is a matter of choice, and if you choose marriage, then stick with your choice! You can't eat your cake and have it. You have to sacrifice something for another. It's better not to get married at all and keep gratifying your reptilian impulses at every opportunity that comes your way than marry and breach the contract, betraying your partner. That's heartless and every shade of despicable. Remember marriage is not by force. You can go your days without going down the aisle with any soul on the planet, but the moment you choose to marry, keep the obligations attached in mind. Don't be a beast!

I find the argument ridiculous and dangerously stupi_d, that men are, by NATURE, polygamous. What is nature? Nature is the jungle! Man is all about TRANSCENDING nature, not succumbing to it. The strong trampling on the weak and taking what they can is NATURE. Yet men founded civilizations, societies with rules and regulations to check such impulses, even though they're natural. That's what differentiates us from the beasts of the field. Being human is not about how much we can give into our bestial impulses and limitations, but how much we can rise above them - that's what the history of human progress and advancement has been all about. If you can't control your animal instincts, what differentiates you from a baboon? There's no excuse for a cheating man, for he knew what marriage is all about before going into it, and should have stayed single if he knew he couldn't handle it.

butterflyl1on, this right here is my answer to your question. What's your response?

---

Tozara

AlmiqhteeAllah:


butterflyl1on, this right here is my answer to your question. What's your response?

My answer is to Cc AgentOfAllah. He is the one who disagrees with what you have submitted.

However you missed out one thing.

Is fornication or adultery perfectly Okay and not wrong when one or either partner gives consent for each to go and play with others?

butterflyl1on:



Who decides what animals are and what humans are?

You say we are animals so based on this notion you believe that acting like animals in the form of consensual fornication and adultery is perfectly alright. However, do animals give consent? If the barbaric nature of an animal is to take by force or cunning what is not his and still feel good about it how then do you talk about consent? As animals whom you say we are then it shouldn't matter to you if consent is given/gotten or not.

I say we are not animals. Anyway let me now derail

I say we are animals, knowing fully well that not animals are the same. If you don't know this, and choose to lump all animals into Hillary's basket of deplorables, that's your fault!
My advocacy is that we should embrace our true nature. We judiciously violate the very rules we pretend to uphold anyway, so we'd do ourselves plenty of good by dropping the pretense all together.

---

Speaking of animal consent, what do you think many animals do when they start their elaborate courtship rituals? Rape?

AgentOfAllah:

I say we are animals, knowing fully well that not animals are the same. If you don't know this, and choose to lump all animals into Hillary's basket of deplorables, that's your fault!
My advocacy is that we should embrace our true nature. We judiciously violate the very rules we pretend to uphold anyway, so we'd do ourselves plenty of good by dropping the pretense all together.

---

Speaking of animal consent, what do you think many animals do when they start their elaborate courtship rituals? Rape?

Read my comment again

If the barbaric nature of an animal is to take by force or cunning what is not his and still feel good about it how then do you talk about consent? As animals whom you say we are then it shouldn't matter to you if consent is given/gotten or not

.

butterflyl1on:


My answer is to Cc AgentOfAllah. He is the one who disagrees with what you have submitted.

I was responding to the SUBJECT OF THE THREAD.

However you missed out one thing.

Is fornication or adultery perfectly Okay and not wrong when one or either partner gives consent for each to go and play with others?

Of course, if your partner consents, there's NOTHING wrong in it, since you won't be HURTING their emotions by so doing. But then, what would be the POINT of marriage?

---

Tozara

butterflyl1on:


You can have the same legal framework protect them even without marriage.

Probably, but marriage is an easy way out, because I wouldn't have to draw up personalized contracts for everybody with whom I am involved.

Since you say sexual devotion is dumb are you an advocate of polygamy or polyandry or both?

I support all the polys (as long as only consensual adults are involved)! Polygyny, polyandry, polyamory...and of course, monopoly (the game)! No one should place limits on how many people you can or should love.

AlmiqhteeAllah:
I was responding to the SUBJECT OF THE THREAD.

Of course, if you partner consents, there's NOTHING wrong in it, since you won't be HURTING their emotions by so doing. But then, what would be the POINT of marriage?

My sentiments exactly. What would be the point of marriage? Why did you choose to get married when you could have stayed single and played the field (which in itself isn't right)

So are you saying fornication is cool but adultery is not?

butterflyl1on:


My sentiments exactly. What would be the point of marriage? Why did you choose to get married when you could have stayed single and played the field (which in itself isn't right)

So are you saying fornication is cool but adultery is not?

Bull's eye! That's exactly how I feel!

AgentOfAllah:
Probably, but marriage is an easy way out, because I wouldn't have to draw up personalized contracts for everybody with whom I am involved.

I support all the polys (as long as only consensual adults are involved)! Polygyny, polyandry, polyamory...and of course, monopoly (the game)! No one should place limits on how many people you can or should love.

Now this is what i don't understand. Not all couples or people hold this view of yours as theirs. They believe in devotion.

If you were married to a woman who believes in devotion even though you obviously do not and you keep having the urge to stray due to various other women you are sexually drawn to and who are also interested and due to your belief that consent makes it right, if and when your wife denies you consent and you can not bear it any longer would you lie to satisfy your craving which matches your worldview?

AlmiqhteeAllah:
Bull's eye! That's exactly how I feel!

Are you an atheist?

butterflyl1on:

Are you an atheist?

Yep!

butterflyl1on:


Read my comment again

.

You read my response again...not all animals are the same! So which kind of animal are you referring to in your hypothetical? I am a human animal, and human animals have a strong sense of empathy; thus rape is a no no in my philosophy.

AlmiqhteeAllah:
Yep!

So fornication is alright but adultery isn't. Okay.

As an atheist what makes marriage powerful enough for you to believe devotion is non negotiable? Is it the vows, the culture, what?

[quote author=AgentOfAllah post=60975132]
Yes I do. The crux of the matter is self-interest, like you mentioned. So if you allow people to pursue their interests, as long as it does not harm anybody, they'll have no need to lie.












when you say people should be allowed to pursue their interests as long as it does not harm anybody, then you're unconsciously impeding on the interest of those that want to harm others, Hence in a bid to allow people behave the way they like, you still ended up creating a standard to carry out these actions, which goes to show that our feelings shouldn't always go unwatched, that's what makes us unique.


















if being more conscious of the consequences of uncontrolled feelings is what you call pretentious, then that's so wrong, This ability to think before acting is what has placed man above other animals. So your opinion that man should do only what he feels like, will most definitely lead to the self destruction of mankind.

butterflyl1on:


You focused on the agreement and not the act. To you it's the agreement or breaking the agreement that makes it wrong but the act itself without any agreements isn't wrong. This is what you are insinuating.

My friend why do you like running meaningless commentaries over simple issues?

The act is wrong because the act is a violation of an agreement. That makes the act wrong. Nothing will be considered wrong if it doesn't violate a principle. Stealing is wrong because it violates a principle, racism is wrong because it violates a principle, murder is wrong because it violates a principle, adultery is wrong because it violates a principle. If no principle is violated then nothing can be said to be wrong.

dalaman:


My friend why do you like running meaningless commentaries over simple issues?

The act is wrong because the act is a violation of an agreement. That makes the act wrong. Nothing will be considered wrong if it doesn't violate a principle. Stealing is wrong because it violates a principle, racism is wrong because it violates a principle, murder is wrong because it violates a principle, adultery is wrong because it violates a principle. If no principle is violated then nothing can be said to be wrong.

I believe you're saying that violation of agreement is wrong IN YOUR OWN OPINION, not that it is necessarily wrong.

Which principle do racism, murder and adultery violate?

butterflyl1on:


So fornication is alright but adultery isn't. Okay.

As an atheist what makes marriage powerful enough for you to believe devotion is non negotiable? Is it the vows, the culture, what?

Because it involves LOVE, which is a powerful enough emotion to make partners proceed with the union in the first place, and since it is built on the foundations of TRUST and FAITHFULNESS, breaching the contract and hurting your partner's emotions is evil to me. It's as simple as that. Of course, your partner can err, and probably will, since no one is perfect, but that doesn't change the fact that it is WRONG. Any more questions, sir?

---

Tozara

AgentOfAllah:

You read my response again...not all animals are the same! So which kind of animal are you referring to in your hypothetical? I am a human animal, and human animals have a strong sense of empathy; thus rape is a no no in my philosophy.

You said

Speaking of animal consent, what do you think many animals do when they start their elaborate courtship rituals? Rape?

You said many an not all animals. So those who do not offer Consent are raped. We cannot be human and animals at the same time so saying we are human animals doesn't work .

If the animals who rape others are Okay after doing it why then is consent so important to you as an animal as well? Should it really matter?

butterflyl1on:


Now this is what i don't understand. Not all couples or people hold this view of yours as theirs. They believe in devotion.

If you were married to a woman who believes in devotion even though you obviously do not and you keep having the urge to stray due to various other women you are sexually drawn to and who are also interested and due to your belief that consent makes it right, if and when your wife denies you consent and you can not bear it any longer would you lie to satisfy your craving which matches your worldview?

Good question! If it comes to that, I would prefer not to lie to her, so I will let her know that I can't bear it any longer, so the ball is in her court. She would either then give me a compelling argument (and I believe I'm a reasonable person) why I shouldn't follow through. If I am convinced, I wouldn't do it. Or she will have to allow me, or we will have to part ways.

However, I hope it never comes to that because this is the kind of thing I'd have ironed out way before we got married.

butterflyl1on:

You said many an not all animals. So those who do not offer Consent are raped. We cannot be human and animals at the same time so saying we are human animals doesn't work .

A dog is a dog and an animal at the same time, a bonobo is a bonobo and an animal at the same time, a fish is a fish and an animal at the same time, but a dog does not behave like a fish and a bonobo certainly doesn't behave like a dog. You can dispute this all you want, if it makes you feel good, but biology says we are human animals, and human animals we are!

AgentOfAllah:

Good question! If it comes to that, I would prefer not to lie to her, so I will let her know that I can't bear it any longer, so the ball is in her court. She would either then give me a compelling argument (and I believe I'm a reasonable person) why I shouldn't follow through. If I am convinced, I wouldn't do it. Or she will have to allow me, or we will have to part ways.

However, I hope it never comes to that because this is the kind of thing I'd have ironed out way before we got married.

So confirming what you said earlier, it's all about selfish interests. You do not believe in sacrifice or endurance in marriage but will simply go where your selfish feelings lead.

Isn't that a bit too mechanical? Where then is the love? You talk like you do not believe in love or that love holds no value to you.

peacesamuel94:

if being more conscious of the consequences of uncontrolled feelings is what you call pretentious, then that's so wrong, This ability to think before acting is what has placed man above other animals. So your opinion that man should do only what he feels like, will most definitely lead to the self destruction of mankind.

Good argument, but I don't think I've ever opined that man should do whatever he feels like. In fact, I've only ever said man should do whatever he wants, as long as it doesn't harm others. So if you can tell me of the negative consequences of consensual sex with multiple partners, you may yet convince me that it is wrong.

AgentOfAllah:


A dog is a dog and an animal at the same time, a bonobo is a bonobo and an animal at the same time, a fish is a fish and an animal at the same time, but a dog does not behave like a fish and a bonobo certainly doesn't behave like a dog. You can dispute this all you want, if it makes you feel good, but biology says we are human animals, and human animals we are!

Well God says I am not an animal but a special breed of creation who can only act and think like an animal when I forsake my maker.

DoctorAlien:


I believe you're saying that violation of agreement is wrong IN YOUR OWN OPINION, not that it is necessarily wrong.

What fvcking shiit is this guy saying?

Which principle do racism, murder and adultery violate?

Racism - you're discriminating against another and DEHUMANIZING them on a dubious basis - skin colour! Nothing, either in heaven or on earth, can justify this fuckery. Savvy?

Murder - You're causing HARM to another for no just reason. Taking their life against their will. That is evil.

Adultery - You're breaching a contract - going back on an agreement. That's wrong.

---

Tozara

AgentOfAllah:


A dog is a dog and an animal at the same time, a bonobo is a bonobo and an animal at the same time, a fish is a fish and an animal at the same time, but a dog does not behave like a fish and a bonobo certainly doesn't behave like a dog. You can dispute this all you want, if it makes you feel good, but biology evolution says we are human animals, and human animals we are!

Fixed.