[100_Percent_Juice]

Originally Posted by sperry

Morality of an action comes from the effect that action has on another. Cheating on your wife is immoral because it hurts your wife. Gay sex is moral because it's consensual and doesn't hurt anyone.

Then you would be basing your morality of gay sex on an individual basis? You say that adultry is immoral because it hurts your wife(emotionally). What if your wife never finds out, is it then moral because she was not hurt? How many gay people have supportive parents? If their actions hurt their parents(emotionally) then does it become immoral? Most importantly you are forgetting about God. It goes against God which would be hurting his feelings.

You have made it clear that you do not believe the bible is the word of God and that's fine. I am not trying to sway your view. The original conversation started with God which takes you into the bible, that I believe. So that's where I am coming from when I post. We are having a discussion and the last thing I want is to make anyone upset. So I am fine with continuing this as long as we keep it a discussion and it doesn't turn into a shouting match.

Originally Posted by sperry

I don't need the word of god to tell me what's moral and what's not... if that's what the Bible is supposed to be for, then it's extremely poorly written, as demonstrated by this very conversation.

I would disagree that it was poorly written but, I would add that it has been poorly translated and twisted by many people. There are many versions and translations resulting in much false information.

Originally Posted by sperry

The golden rule of simply treating others the way you wish to be treated is all you really need in order to determine morality of an action, or more accurately, the golden rule should be "treat others the way they wish to be treated".

What you are referring to is called the Platinum rule. I don't understand what you would do differently between the rules unless a person wanted you to treat them like a king and kiss their ring.

Originally Posted by sperry

Human society is our greatest achievement and the reason why we're the dominant animal on the planet... we have the ability to protect those that would otherwise fall to the anarchy that comes without morality.

I agree that man has made many advancements but there are still extreme problems that man has yet to solve. 16,000 children die every day because of hunger. If this society was so great that statistic would not be there. There is enough food to feed those people but due to politics and government it can't reach them. Who is here to protect them?

Originally Posted by sperry

I guess all I can say is that I'd rather err on the side of allowing gay folks to live their lives as they choose... I don't believe it's more relevant to determining the way anyone should live their lives than letting people determine for themselves what it means to be a good person.

I agree about not forcing belief or morality on another individual. However, I feel that there is nothing wrong with talking about beliefs like we are doing now. I personally feel that mankind ruled under a single government with a single set of rules for everyone would work much better than everyone just choosing their own definition of right and wrong. This is what the bible teaches and I do believe it. Again, this is just what I believe.