This Site Aims to Promote the Historic Oil Region of Northwestern Pennsylvania as a Welcoming Place for All and to Challenge the Bigotry of Those Who Seek to Exclude Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender People from Open and Equal Participation in Community Life, particularly the Venango County-based Hate Group known as the American Family Association of Pennsylvania. Learn more at OutintheSilence.com
This is a classic example of the is/ought fallacy. That is because something is natural, it doesn't follow that one ought to obey it. If it's natural for me to steal, ought I merely follow my natural inclination. You might ask, " When did you decide to steal?" Or "When did you decide to not steal?" Consider this. Do you have a natural desire to steal and choose to not to do that? Why? If it's natural and that's how we decide right and wrong, then one need only appeal to the desire and be completely morally justtified to do that. And no one can say otherwise.
See http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6796
It's good to see that you continue to try to think these things through Rob, but guidance from a web site interestingly named "Stand To Reason" might hinder, rather than aid, your journey. Here are just a few tidbits from this site's "Statement of Faith" --
#10 - All those who persistently reject Jesus Christ in the present life shall be raised from the dead and throughout eternity exist in a state of conscious, endless torment and anguish.
#12 - There is a personal devil, a being of great cunning who can exert vast power only so far as God allows him to do so. He shall ultimately be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone and shall be tormented day and night forever.
Interesting comment Rob Lazar. Instead of dealing with the question at hand you change it to stealing. Why??? Just think about the question. When did you think about being straight? Its pretty simple I would think, but instead you want to compare it to stealing. If you think stealing is something natural you have bigger problems and sexual orientation is the least of them.
The comparison to another natural tendency is to point out that just because something is natural doesn't make it okay. That's what's behind the "When did you choose to be straight?" question. And that's where the fallacy resides. It's the is/ought fallacy. In other words you don't get an ought from an is.
You actually have proved a point that often goes unstated. Man is a sinner. When did man choose to be a sinner? It is not that man chooses to be a sinner that is the problem. It is the rejecting of the Word of God which informs him of his sinful state. We do not just go out and become sinners! We do not rob a service station and become a sinner. We do not abuse our wives and become sinners. We do not rape and cheat and steal, and become sinners. We do these things because we are sinners. The whole question of when did you become straight is illogical. It presupposes a fallacy where none exists. Fresh water and pure may be enjoyed indeed we all enjoy the magnificence of falls of water of grandeur and pleasant rains on dry lands. However, that same water may flow through regions where it is no longer in its useful state, but rather polluted, corruptible, an issuer of death. The fact that water may be made impure, that it may not be seen from its source, but rather only from the corruptible influences that poison it, is not to suggest that the former is less desirable, but that the corrupted be avoided. No man purposely takes a bath in dirty water, nor gives it to his child to drink unless there is something that has confused his judgement.
8 comments:
This is a classic example of the is/ought fallacy. That is because something is natural, it doesn't follow that one ought to obey it. If it's natural for me to steal, ought I merely follow my natural inclination. You might ask, "
When did you decide to steal?" Or "When did you decide to not steal?" Consider this. Do you have a natural desire to steal and choose to not to do that? Why? If it's natural and that's how we decide right and wrong, then one need only appeal to the desire and be completely morally justtified to do that. And no one can say otherwise.
See http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6796
It's good to see that you continue to try to think these things through Rob, but guidance from a web site interestingly named "Stand To Reason" might hinder, rather than aid, your journey. Here are just a few tidbits from this site's "Statement of Faith" --
#10 - All those who persistently reject Jesus Christ in the present life shall be raised from the dead and throughout eternity exist in a state of conscious, endless torment and anguish.
#12 - There is a personal devil, a being of great cunning who can exert vast power only so far as God allows him to do so. He shall ultimately be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone and shall be tormented day and night forever.
That's good 'reasoning' indeed :-)
How do you expect to persuade me to your point of view, Joe, if you merely dismiss my case that invalidates your link?
Well Rob, you've demonstrated over and over and over again that you're not capable of meaningful dialogue.
But, your journey is your journey.
You'll either get to a good place, or be left behind, which is not only more likely the case, it's already happening.
Oh well ...
Why do you hate me so much? If I'm lost or confused, wouldn't the right thing be dialog istead of ignoring?
Interesting comment Rob Lazar. Instead of dealing with the question at hand you change it to stealing. Why??? Just think about the question. When did you think about being straight? Its pretty simple I would think, but instead you want to compare it to stealing. If you think stealing is something natural you have bigger problems and sexual orientation is the least of them.
The comparison to another natural tendency is to point out that just because something is natural doesn't make it okay. That's what's behind the "When did you choose to be straight?" question. And that's where the fallacy resides. It's the is/ought fallacy. In other words you don't get an ought from an is.
Rob,
You actually have proved a point that often goes unstated. Man is a sinner. When did man choose to be a sinner?
It is not that man chooses to be a sinner that is the problem. It is the rejecting of the Word of God which informs him of his sinful state.
We do not just go out and become sinners! We do not rob a service station and become a sinner. We do not abuse our wives and become sinners. We do not rape and cheat and steal, and become sinners. We do these things because we are sinners.
The whole question of when did you become straight is illogical. It presupposes a fallacy where none exists.
Fresh water and pure may be enjoyed indeed we all enjoy the magnificence of falls of water of grandeur and pleasant rains on dry lands.
However, that same water may flow through regions where it is no longer in its useful state, but rather polluted, corruptible, an issuer of death.
The fact that water may be made impure, that it may not be seen from its source, but rather only from the corruptible influences that poison it, is not to suggest that the former is less desirable, but that the corrupted be avoided.
No man purposely takes a bath in dirty water, nor gives it to his child to drink unless there is something that has confused his judgement.
Post a Comment