To our atheist friends

Dear friends, i have often wondered at your attitude towards the morality of the mosaic
law and its moral ordinances. You have cited such terms as barbaric and to be sure,
the penalties for transgression were severe, for example homosexuality, adultery,
bestiality, were capital crimes and carried the punishment of death by stoning.

However my question is this, is it unreasonable to ask persons to refrain from adultery,
homosexuality and bestiality? What do you think?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Dear friends, i have often wondered at your attitude towards the morality of the mosaic
law and its moral ordinances. You have cited such terms as barbaric and to be sure,
the penalties for transgression were severe, for example homosexuality, adultery,
bestiality, were capital crimes and carried the punishment of death by stoning.

Howeve ...[text shortened]... ble to ask persons to refrain from adultery,
homosexuality and bestiality? What do you think?

And would one have to give up all three, discuss. 😛

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Dear friends, i have often wondered at your attitude towards the morality of the mosaic
law and its moral ordinances. You have cited such terms as barbaric and to be sure,
the penalties for transgression were severe, for example homosexuality, adultery,
bestiality, were capital crimes and carried the punishment of death by stoning.

Howeve ...[text shortened]... ble to ask persons to refrain from adultery,
homosexuality and bestiality? What do you think?

it is completely unreasonable to interfere with the private sexual activities of anyone so long as no predatory activities are taking place.

Originally posted by ChessPraxis
And would one have to give up all three, discuss. 😛

Is it unreasonable for God to ask a persons to refrain from one or all three?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
it is completely unreasonable to interfere with the private sexual activities of anyone so long as no predatory activities are taking place.

I dont think you can use the, 'its my own business I can do what i like in private',
excuse, for a start, adultery affects more than one person, whole families can be torn
apart.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I dont think you can use the, 'its my own business', excuse, for a start, adultery affects
more than one person, whole families can be torn apart.

and killing them won't tear those families apart?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
However my question is this, is it unreasonable to ask persons to refrain from adultery,
homosexuality and bestiality? What do you think?

Well I am not an atheist, robbie, but if I may I will make comment anyway. Adultery involves deceit and there is in most cases a victim. Bestiality and paedophilia are sexual assaults or abuse because there is - and can be - no informed consent and there are therefore quite clearly victims. But homosexuality? What's wrong with homosexuality? It doesn't belong on the same list as adultery and bestiality. Why do you think it does?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
and killing them won't tear those families apart?

we are not talking about the penalties, why this should have escaped your notice i
cannot say, we are talking about whether its reasonable for God to expect a person to
refrain from such activities, I've only mentioned it three times, for i knew it would be
difficult to keep you focused.

Originally posted by FMF
Well I am not an atheist, robbie, but if I may I will make comment anyway. Adultery involves deceit and there is in most cases a victim. Bestiality and paedophilia are sexual assaults or abuse because there is - and can be - no informed consent and there are therefore quite clearly victims. But homosexuality? What's wrong with homosexuality? It doesn't belong on the same list as adultery and bestiality. Why do you think it does?

it simply, from a biblical stand point, transgresses sexual morality, as do adultery and
bestiality, however, why is it unreasonable for God to ask a person to refrain from the
practice, this is the question.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its simply, from a biblical stand point transgresses sexual morality, as do adultery and
bestiality, however, why is it unreasonable for God to ask a person to refrain from the
practice, this is the question.

Well atheists don't subscribe to 'God's instructions' about the sexual morality of homosexuality, adultery and bestiality. I have argued that, morally speaking, and 'what God asks' aside, homosexuality does not belong on the same list as adultery and bestiality. And you have just sidestepped it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
we are not talking about the penalties, why this should have escaped your notice i
cannot say, wee are talking about whether its reasonable for God to expect a person to
refrain from such activities, ive only mentioned it three times, for i knew it would be
difficult to keep you focused.

if you're not talking about the penalties, whey did you bring them up in the OP?

adultery for example is a derivative of a social contract that does not exist in every culture. the mosuo for example are a semi-matriarchal culture where lineage is traced through the women and they may have sexual relations with any number of men and often don't know who are the fathers of their children.

so who are you to tell these people how they should live their lives, who is your god to do so? nay, it is not our place nor the place of your god to make such demands.

a more honorable requirement would be one of honesty and faithfulness to contracts/treaties.
in this respect, the traditional "marriage" is a contract an so an act of "adultery" would be a violation of the contract. but the consequences of such violations should be included in each individual contract and worked out in advance.

Originally posted by FMF
Well atheists don't subscribe to 'God's instructions' about the sexual morality of homosexuality, adultery and bestiality. I have argued that, morally speaking, and 'what God asks' aside, homosexuality does not belong on the same list as adultery and bestiality. And you have just sidestepped it.

its irrelevant whether they subscribe to it or not, they have termed the Laws and
ordinances, barbaric, yet it struck me, that, to ask a person to refrain from such
practices, was not unreasonable at all. Its not my concern whether homosexuality is
listed with adultery or bestiality, its a transgression of the Mosaic law, that's all i am
interested in.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its irrelevant whether they subscribe to it or not, they have termed the Laws and
ordinances, barbaric, yet it struck me, that, to ask a person to refrain from such
practices, was not unreasonable at all. Its not my concern whether homosexuality is
listed with adultery or bestiality, its a transgression of the Mosaic law, that's all i am
interested in.

But atheists do not subscribe to Mosaic Law, robbie. Is it your premise that they do?

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
if you're not talking about the penalties, whey did you bring them up in the OP?

adultery for example is a derivative of a social contract that does not exist in every culture. the mosuo for example are a semi-matriarchal culture where lineage is traced through the women and they may have sexual relations with any number of men and often don't know wh ...[text shortened]... such violations should be included in each individual contract and worked out in advance.

yet you cannot bring yourself to state why it might be reasonable to ask a person to
desist from transgressing the laws on sexual morality. Citing other cultures and their
practices is irrelevant, the Law was specific towards the Nation of Israel.

Originally posted by FMF
But atheists do not subscribe to Mosaic Law, robbie. Is it your premise that they do?

its irrelevant whether they subscribe to it or not, after all, i am not asking them to live
under its ordinances, am I. If they have an opinion that its barbaric, they should also
certainly form an opinion as to why its unreasonable for God to expect a person to live
by its tenets, regardless of whether they themselves ascribe to it or not.