Interpretation of Texts (General)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, September 29, 2010, 22:19 (5167 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

As to my comment in the last post about custom fit religions and preconceived notions:
> 
> 
> For a few moments, suspend everything you know about right and wrong, good and bad, human rights, and any other form of preconceived morality. Focus instead on known physical and mental health issues, community unity and moral, victims both intentional and unintentional.
> 
> Now, ask yourself a few questions:
> 
> Is homosexuality healthy? (from a purely physical standpoint)
What's my operational definition of healthy? To me this is an act that carries a risk and isn't in itself "unhealthy," when "good health" is defined as my human body being fit. If however, unhealthy is described as "taking uncalculated health risks" than no it isn't. -> Is it more or less healthy in a world without prophylactics?
What's my operational definition of healthy? Here you seem to be directly equating the taking of a risk as "unhealthy." I don't find risk-taking unhealthy. -> Is bestiality healthy?
What's my operational definition of healthy? 
Bestiality is again, an act that carries no intrinsic issues on health. I think in documented literature I haven't heard of any cases where human partners in these couplings suffer long-term illness or diseases caught from the animals. -> Is promiscuous unprotected sex healthy?
What's my operational definition of healthy? Again, I don't read "Risk taking" as "unhealthy."-> Is promiscuous sex mentally healthy? (Considering all psychology we currently know)
Hard for me to answer; it depends so much on what the parties have in mind when they engage in it. Depends on the self-confidence of the participants; there is no cookbook solution to this. -> Is adultery healthy to either the individuals involved, the family unit, or the community?
> 
Here you're using healthy in terms of psychology; this relies upon social norms in order to decide; you're asking me to make a moral claim based on health issues. We need clear definitions here if we're going to get concise answers. It's unhealthy if society's morals decree it unhealthy, and it is enforced implicitly or explicitly by members of the society. -Have you looked into open couples who are also open about what they do with their children? Penn and Teller have an episode of Bullshit where they tackle this exact issue. -> Is the life of the individual worth more than the life of the tribe?(again, no preconceived morals)
> -Depends on the circumstance. -> Is it conducive to a well functioning society to lie, steal, or sleep with another persons spouse?
> -Loaded question; Balance, you tell us NOT to bring in preconceived ideas of morals, but all of these issues you bring up are going to be shaded by what we think about morals.-1. What are the circumstances that the society is lying in? Sometimes lying is good. -2. Stealing can also be good, depending on the circumstances. -3. Sleeping with another person's wife is absolutely fine if that person and his wife are fine with the arrangement. -There is no cookbook answer for these questions. -> If there are two people in a group, can two people lead that group, or should one follow the others lead, and the leader take the followers thoughts and feelings into account for any decision that is made, and bear the responsibility for those decisions?
> -Depends on the individuals; again no cookbook answer here. -> Considering the following statement:"68% percent of males and 58% of females are rearrested, and 53% and 39% respectively are re-incarcerated"
> 
> And considering: $68,747,203,000 was the amount spent on incarceration costs in 2006 alone in the U.S.
> 
> Does it make sense for a society to rehabilitate people who violate their laws, when nearly 70% are not going to change?-It makes more sense to advocate agnosticism and atheism if we're going to talk society, culture, and law. 85% of the United States professes Christianity. 2% atheist/agnostic. Our prisons contain a religious demographic of 85% Christian, 0.5% Atheist/Agnostic. Extrapolate the math and there is a 3:1 ratio of atheists/agnostics that don't go to prison for every Christian who goes to prison.-[EDITED]-Balance, ethics and morals are designed to guide us in making decisions when there is no clear-cut answer. In other words; they are pre-conceived by design. You need to separate healthy from moral. Nearly all of the issues you've raised here are moral issues and not health issues.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"