Having Sex With A Dead Chicken- Moral or Immoral?

Author: Safalcon7

Posts

Total: 34
Timid8967
Timid8967's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 459
2
2
2
Timid8967's avatar
Timid8967
2
2
2
-->
@Theweakeredge
Okay let's put you in a scenario - you're starving - you think that stealing is generally bad - but you do so in order to survive, does that mean that person isn't against stealing? No - it means that person acted in desperation - it isn't "if it's not convenient" you have entirely missed the words "HAVE TOO" in the qualifier their bud. Yes it is a moral view that says you shouldn't do it all, but just as all moral views make extremely clear IF ITS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THAT THEN YOU DO YOUR BEST.

For example - would the fact that a Christian lied once make them not a Christian? Would the fact that a Christian sinned at all somehow make them not a Christian? No....because its a FRAMEWORK and even if you don't apply to it at all, the fact that you accept it to be the correct moral framework means you accept it. 
This is a scenario that works for you. I don't know how many others it would work for. It depends upon how their ethics works.  I remember reading a book called the Foxes Book of Marytrs.  It had a story of a young Christian girl - who was told to deny that Jesus is god or have her hand burnt by a candle. She was holding her hand over a candle - forcefully. She refused to deny Jesus and her hand was seriously burnt. She then was thrown to the lions.   It would be convenient for her to give up her faith - but she did not.  She could have thought of her temporal life rather than eternal life.  But she didn't.  Her ethics were not pragmatic. They led to her death for what she truly believed.  

perhaps your morality or ethics thinks that your own personal life is more important than the animals.  I think that is situational ethics. It is (in my opinion) a fake ethical position.  If something is right - it is right.  If it is wrong - it is wrong. I think having sex with a chicken is wrong - just like I think it is sick to have sex with a baby.  I cannot think of any reason why this might change.  Yet - you seem to be saying - it depends on whether you have the option or not.  Or whether there is an alternative that justifies it or not.  

Christianity is more complex than you are allowing.  
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Timid8967
Then I suppose you would think that that Christian isn't a Christian if they had put down the candle? Again - the mere fact that you don't adhere to a proposition does not mean that you don't accept it. That's not situational ethics, that is literally every single human being. By that definition every single human being operates on situational ethics, in that case, your criticism is non-unique and you provide no practical solution to it.

You seem to think that pragmatics and ethics are separate, they are not - if you cannot actually *do* a thing, then any ethical value is literally useless. 
Safalcon7
Safalcon7's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 73
0
1
7
Safalcon7's avatar
Safalcon7
0
1
7
-->
@Timid8967
I don't get how it's both subjective and objective at the same time. You claim "while the culture says so" its immoral. But cultures themselves differ. What if a nomad-heavy society out in the woods gavels in favor of a normalized practice of having sex with dead animals? Would you say it's still objective? Utilitarians fail in this case- when they say its immoral cause people say so. But howabout the maximized pleasure of the one having sex and the fact that the chicken is no longer harmed in its demised state? According to their intrinsic principles, the act should be regarded as moral but then they contradict themselves by calling it sick and unethical.

My point being, unless you offer pure subjectivity or pure objectivity, this act can't be defended morally. And so any atheist who claims objectivity in his ethics through utilitarianism cannot resort to utilitarianism to prove his position here.
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,102
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Oh, Sorry, I thought this forum was about Trump having sex with Melania. Or the other way around.