Same Sex Marriage Re-Visited.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There's fuck all that is 'ethical' about your behaviour on this thread.

Really? Like what?

[Aruntraveller]

Charming.
Wanting to shut down ethical questions on a forum with "ethics' in the title.......we're done I suggest.

Nope - not done.

Not an ethical question is it? Gay conversion therapy. It's damaging and horrific. The real ethical question is why you feel the need to play your little game with this horrible topic. Save it for your love affair with Dawkins et al. You can ramble on in your usual fashion, trying to play from both sides of the fence but in the end make up your mind whether it's acceptable in a civilised society. Once you've worked that out, your responses should fall firmly one side of the net. Hopefully the human side rather the pedantic, shitty, lets play a jolly game with this.

Now I'm done.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Nope - not done.

Not an ethical question is it? Gay conversion therapy. It's damaging and horrific. The real ethical question is why you feel the need to play your little game with this horrible topic. Save it for your love affair with Dawkins et al. You can ramble on in your usual fashion, trying to play from both sides of the fence but in the end make up your mind whether it's acceptable in a civilised society. Once you've worked that out, your responses should fall firmly one side of the net. Hopefully the human side rather the pedantic, shitty, lets play a jolly game with this.

Now I'm done.

Sorry, you're mistaking me for someone who should be galvanised by your ill informed comments.
The questions are this how should you approach someone who wants this treatment.

Secondly, why is gender reassignment acceptable for some yet for the same sexuality reassignment isn't

And thirdly, the same question to people who think life to death reassignment is acceptable.

All reasonable questions for a supposed ethics forum met with what looks suspiciously like intellectual fascism......that's a fancy equivalent of your phrase STFU.

[Gordon]

The questions are this how should you approach someone who wants this treatment.

You advise them to take professional advice (unless of course you are qualified to give informed advice on the spot). The links posted earlier should give you a clue as to what this advice might be.

Secondly, why is gender reassignment acceptable for some yet for the same sexuality reassignment isn't

I'd advise you to find out about more about 'gender' and 'sexuality' before you conflate them further.

And thirdly, the same question to people who think life to death reassignment is acceptable.

If you mean voluntary euthanasia there is ample information about that from various perspectives: so, again (unless you are qualified to give expert advice) you advise that expert advice should be sought - I'd have thought you'd be able to work that out for yourself!

All reasonable questions for a supposed ethics forum met with what looks suspiciously like intellectual fascism......that's a fancy equivalent of your phrase STFU.

Perhaps you'd be better advised to learn a little more about the issues themselves first, such as understanding the differences between the terms 'gender' and 'sexuality', before cogitating on any ethical perspectives - and no, I'm not going to do the work for you.

[SteveH]

As there is nothing wrong with being gay, why should anyone wish to change to being a heterosexual? There are many gay Christians, and some churches will conduct gay marriage. If god was a good entity it would  have no problem with people being gay.

1. - Whether there's anything wrong with being gay is the question being debated, so your firsr sentence is a circular argument.
2. - churches are not allowed to conduct gay marriages.
3. - who the hell do you think you are, presuming to know the mind of God?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You advise them to take professional advice (unless of course you are qualified to give informed advice on the spot). The links posted earlier should give you a clue as to what this advice might be.

I'd advise you to find out about more about 'gender' and 'sexuality' before you conflate them further.

If you mean voluntary euthanasia there is ample information about that from various perspectives: so, again (unless you are qualified to give expert advice) you advise that expert advice should be sought - I'd have thought you'd be able to work that out for yourself!

Perhaps you'd be better advised to learn a little more about the issues themselves first, such as understanding the differences between the terms 'gender' and 'sexuality', before cogitating on any ethical perspectives - and no, I'm not going to do the work for you.

I don't expect you to since you strike me as someone who has other people collect the condensate from your vapours in silver bowls.

Look Gordon it is straight forward why is choosing to pursue having gender reassignment ok but choosing to pursue sexuality reassignment a bad thing or facial tattoos for that matter.?

[SteveH]

I don't expect you to since you strike me as someone who has other people collect the condensate from your vapours in silver bowls.

Look Gordon it is straight forward why is choosing to pursue having gender reassignment ok but choosing to pursue sexuality reassignment a bad thing or facial tattoos for that matter.?

Because there's no such thing as sexuality reassignment - it doesn't work, and it does do a lot of harm.

[Aruntraveller]

Because there's no such thing as sexuality reassignment - it doesn't work, and it does do a lot of harm.

Thank you for putting that in much more temperate language than I was going to use.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Because there's no such thing as sexuality reassignment - it doesn't work, and it does do a lot of harm.

See folks.......that's how it's done.

[Gordon]

I don't expect you to since you strike me as someone who has other people collect the condensate from your vapours in silver bowls.

Look Gordon it is straight forward why is choosing to pursue having gender reassignment ok but choosing to pursue sexuality reassignment a bad thing or facial tattoos for that matter.?

Leaving aside the issue of tattoos, which is a specious comparison with the other issues mentioned, your ability to conflate these things is either mischievous or due to ignorance (or possibly both). That you will struggle to find 'sexuality reassignment' treatment in professional UK health provision might give you a clue as to why the comparison you make with gender reassignment is a pointless one.   

[Aruntraveller]

The questions are this how should you approach someone who wants this treatment.

So if someone approaches you and says I want to take poison because it's good for me, you'll do your best to facilitate their wish?

Or will you simply state actually taking poison isn't good for you and you shouldn't do it.

This is not fucking rocket science.

As to gender reassignment - I'm not an expert on that, but I understand from what I have read that a lot of people who undergo such assignment actually benefit from the process. Unlike gay conversion therapy.

If you want to talk about end of life choices I'd suggest you start another thread on that.

As to the charge of

intellectual fascism

I thank you for the recognition of intellectual but fascism had nothing to do with it. Just a response to you wishing to suggest that there is any justification for conversion therapy. I've seen what it does to someone, you really wouldn't be so fucking blasé if you had witnessed the effect it has on a person.

PS When I said I was done, I was of course, using the patented Vlad method of leaving a topic and then immediately returning to it.

A vladerang if you will.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So if someone approaches you and says I want to take poison because it's good for me, you'll do your best to facilitate their wish?

Or will you simply state actually taking poison isn't good for you and you shouldn't do it.

This is not fucking rocket science.

As to gender reassignment - I'm not an expert on that, but I understand from what I have read that a lot of people who undergo such assignment actually benefit from the process. Unlike gay conversion therapy.

If you want to talk about end of life choices I'd suggest you start another thread on that.

As to the charge of  I thank you for the recognition of intellectual but fascism had nothing to do with it. Just a response to you wishing to suggest that there is any justification for conversion therapy. I've seen what it does to someone, you really wouldn't be so fucking blasé if you had witnessed the effect it has on a person.

PS When I said I was done, I was of course, using the patented Vlad method of leaving a topic and then immediately returning to it.

A vladerang if you will.

I have just laid out the libertarian argument namely If you want something then you should be allowed to have it and if it isnt available then effort should be made to make it so.

That doesnt mean that I am a libertarian.
Those who usually take the libertarian approach yet suspend it for particular situations must have particular reasons.

[Aruntraveller]

I have just laid out the libertarian argument namely If you want something then you should be allowed to have it and if it isnt available then effort should be made to make it so.

That doesnt mean that I am a libertarian.
Those who usually take the libertarian approach yet suspend it for particular situations must have particular reasons.

Aye well. Libertarian seems an unusually vague term to me. The fact that Ayn Rand (altho Rand herself denied this - but as she is considered by other right wing libertarians to be a guiding light I think I'd allow the definition to apply) and Arlo Guthrie are considered libertarians, makes the concept quite a remarkable "broad church".

So I think before you use the term it would be useful to define what you mean by it. As I am not, by any of the definitions I've seen, a true libertarian you may need to take this up with someone else. (Where's Shaker?) 

[Gordon]

I have just laid out the libertarian argument namely If you want something then you should be allowed to have it and if it isnt available then effort should be made to make it so.

That doesnt mean that I am a libertarian.
Those who usually take the libertarian approach yet suspend it for particular situations must have particular reasons.

You seem to be confusing being libertarian in outlook with encouraging ill-informed recklessness.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Aye well. Libertarian seems an unusually vague term to me. The fact that Ayn Rand (altho Rand herself denied this - but as she is considered by other right wing libertarians to be a guiding light I think I'd allow the definition to apply) and Arlo Guthrie are considered libertarians, makes the concept quite a remarkable "broad church".

So I think before you use the term it would be useful to define what you mean by it. As I am not, by any of the definitions I've seen, a true libertarian you may need to take this up with someone else. (Where's Shaker?)

I defined what I meant.as the belief that If you want something it should be available or effort put in to make it available.

Those who regularly subscribe to this and suspend it for certain reasons must have particular reasons to do this.

Let me punt another example.

Is it desirable for men to bear children

Yes if people want it.

But it is not possible medically

Then efforts should be allowed to make it possible

.....that is imho the libertarian argument exemplified.

What I have not done is endorse this argument
Or gay conversion. I have not made any moral judgments whatsoever.

[Gordon]

I defined what I meant.as the belief that If you want something it should be available or effort put in to make it available.

Those who regularly subscribe to this and suspend it for certain reasons must have particular reasons to do this.

Let me punt another example.

Is it desirable for men to bear children

Yes if people want it.

But it is not possible medically

Then efforts should be allowed to make it possible

.....that is imho the libertarian argument exemplified.

What I have not done is endorse this argument
Or gay conversion. I have not made any moral judgments whatsoever.

Instead you've just decided to misrepresent libertarianism by conflating it with enabling reckless choices using examples you know to be spurious.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Instead you've just decided to misrepresent libertarianism by conflating it with enabling reckless choices using examples you know to be spurious.

Eh?
How is illustrating libertarianism with gender reassignment,
Assisted dying, and male birth spurious when they adequately demonstrate the principles of libertarianism?

[Gordon]

Eh?
How is illustrating libertarianism with gender reassignment,
Assisted dying, and male birth spurious when they adequately demonstrate the principles of libertarianism?

You forgot to mention the 'sexuality reassignment' that you raised earlier.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You forgot to mention the 'sexuality reassignment' that you raised earlier.

Why do you think that the libertarian argument might not work there?

[Gordon]

Why do you think that the libertarian argument might not work there?

Try reading previous replies and links.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Try reading previous replies and links.

I have.Conflating the statement of an argument with endorsement of it has never been a good look for someone who considers themselves a master logician.

[Roses]

1. - Whether there's anything wrong with being gay is the question being debated, so your firsr sentence is a circular argument.
2. - churches are not allowed to conduct gay marriages.
3. - who the hell do you think you are, presuming to know the mind of God?

There is nothing wrong with being gay, it is only sick bigots who wish to believe it is unnatural.

Some churches have conducted  gay wedding ceremonies and blessings.

If the Bible is a reflection of the mind of god, should it exist, I have a perfect right to state my opinion.

[Robbie]

I think SteveH made a grammatical mistake in his point 1.

Agree that some churches do conduct same sex weddings but it's not allowed in CofE, Catholic & I presume Orthodox.  Within the CofE there are some ministers who will do it, separate from the register office ceremony, but because of the rules they don't 'advertise' it.

[Spud]

Or, Spud, you could just stop worrying about homosexuality, mind your own business, treat people as individuals, respect their individuality and privacy and simply let people live their lives as they see fit without reference to your personal preferences.

For the record, I did all the above; the person I was referring to brought up the subject and volunteered the information about himself.

[Spud]

Sweeping generalisation or lie?

Just stop being fucking insulting. Stop endorsing gay conversion therapy and just go and clean your teeth.

I was questioning the assertion that same-sex attraction is irreversible, that's all.