Atlas Sexual Morality Poll

[TJ in Oregon]

Disagree with all of them.

[TJ in Oregon]

Disagree with all of them.

On #4, "Agree" is the socon one, or am I misjudging your views?

Whoops. I misread it. I don't believe in divorce unless there is abuse generally. You tripped me up by switching it around with that one.

[TJ in Oregon]

I didn't realize just how conservative the general populace was on sexual issues. I mean, over two-thirds of the population think porn is immoral? Really?

Remember that is different than thinking it should be illegal.

Yeah, that much was obvious. I just underestimated how anti-porn most people's personal views were.

Well, I'm sure a significant number of them are lying.

Why would they lie about whether or not they believe it's immoral? The question asked whether or not they think it's OK not whether or not they do it. I'm sure there are plenty of people who believe it's wrong but still view it.

[TJ in Oregon]

Because to consistently engage in something that you legitimately believe is wrong is unhealthy and destructive. I'm sure you're describing a significant number of people, and it's frankly a shame that they've been guilted into thinking that something as innocent as porn is "morally bankrupt," but, more often than not, I don't think someone who faps to porn everyday could truly believe it's immoral. I do think, though, that many people who enjoy porn are brought up in socially-conservative environments where the only right answer to the question is "yes, porn's bad."

I think what it comes down to is that a good number of them actually believe in Christianity and have not discarded the aspects of sexual morality that come with it (barring liberal Christianity of course), including believing masturbation is a sin. A lot of them don't have the strength to actually stop. So they can go a couple directions from there, either continue in a state of internal conflict, find the strength to stop, or take the standard narcissistic modern approach and redefine their moral beliefs to fit their lifestyle. I know we live in an era where nothing is ever supposed to hurt our self-esteem, or heaven forbid require us to make any difficult changes to our lifestyle, but perhaps not everyone believes they're God's gift to the world and never do anything wrong. Some people recognize that they are sinners even if they don't stop.

[TJ in Oregon]

Because to consistently engage in something that you legitimately believe is wrong is unhealthy and destructive. I'm sure you're describing a significant number of people, and it's frankly a shame that they've been guilted into thinking that something as innocent as porn is "morally bankrupt," but, more often than not, I don't think someone who faps to porn everyday could truly believe it's immoral. I do think, though, that many people who enjoy porn are brought up in socially-conservative environments where the only right answer to the question is "yes, porn's bad."

I think what it comes down to is that a good number of them actually believe in Christianity and have not discarded the aspects of sexual morality that come with it (barring liberal Christianity of course), including believing masturbation is a sin. A lot of them don't have the strength to actually stop. So they can go a couple directions from there, either continue in a state of internal conflict, find the strength to stop, or take the standard narcissistic modern approach and redefine their moral beliefs to fit their lifestyle. I know we live in an era where nothing is ever supposed to hurt our self-esteem, or heaven forbid require us to make any difficult changes to our lifestyle, but perhaps not everyone believes they're God's gift to the world and never do anything wrong. Some people recognize that they are sinners even if they don't stop.

Why is "redefining your moral beliefs" so wrong? I'd rather live my life exploring the world and reaching my own conclusions about morality than unquestioningly accept someone else's moral code. There's no standard here. These are difficult questions for a reason, and if they're not difficult I kind of question whether you're doing it right. There's more to the world than rules and baseless self-restraint.

Because what's the point in believing anything's wrong if you're just going to change it every time you do something in violation?

[TJ in Oregon]

You've accepted another persons moral code, or the moral code of another body which likes to think that it doesn't change but it does. Views of what is right and wrong are based on interaction with other individuals. An isolated person has an isolated mind. Internalising one moral code without recourse to experience or empathy for that which you cannot or do not experience but others do, is morally flawed. If you are not challenged by the outside world to constantly re-evaluate the moral code that you have chosen to internalise to best fit an ideology you concurrently subscribe to, you are not holding a morally superior position.

None of that actually defines a moral code though and neither does empathy. Whether or not shares feelings with someone else or feels for them doesn't give any information about whether a particular act is morally licit or not. What does depends on the framework from which those moral beliefs come from. That's why unless your moral basis is sociological journals, no number of studies saying something is beneficial say anything about whether or not it's morally licit. It's also why we're inevitably talking past each other in these threads: there's no point in arguing about whether or not something is moral when we don't have the same definition of morality, unless we can argue against the other's point of view from within the moral framework they subscribe to. In order to convince each other, you would have to convince me there is no God and I would have to convince you there is a God and He's the God of Christianity, among a number of things stemming from those statements. I could be wrong, but I suspect neither of our beliefs are founded upon the moral qualms of masturbation. Our moral views of masturbation stem from something much larger than that particular act or who we'll encounter who does or doesn't masturbate.

In the context of Christianity (which I'm invoking for two reasons: 1. I am a Christian 2. The majority of Americans are Christians and the American public is the subject of this branch of the discussion), masturbation is sinful. If jmfcst wasn't banned I'm sure he would rattle off a dozen Bible quotes agreeing with that statement (I'll spare you ) but it's clear from both scripture and tradition (meaning the hermeneutic of continuity) that masturbation is sinful in the context of Christianity. To accept that moral framework and then reject its conclusion doesn't make any sense. However, people will do that because it's easier and makes them feel good about themselves. Other people instead conclude that their framework of morality is still correct, just that they aren't perfectly moral themselves. The latter, which Hagrid doesn't seem to think possible, is the identity of the people we were discussing and likely how many of them arrive at their beliefs on the subject.

[TJ in Oregon]

I just took the opportunity to go back through some of these comments and the results. It's amazing just how far outside of the mainstream the youth, specifically on here, are these days. The results for #1, 3 and 6 are genuinely terrifying. Is this the price we pay for the Bush's quagmire? Total rebellion against all that is good because a southern Christian made a grave moral error. Forever the worst President.

Not to take too much blame off Blow Job Bill and his sidekick who invented the disaster known as the Internet.

I think it's a mistake to pin the blame so heavily on Dubya. Yes, his presidency helped to cause a backlash against Christian morality, but it ultimately goes a lot deeper than that. What may appear to be problem that is political, it's really philosophical and theological in nature. If all it takes for people to abandon moral principles is a president they don't like, then they never really believed in them in the first place. And I think we're seeing another iteration of it with some of the Never-Trumper Republicans. And I think as long as "moral principles" are actually just political positions taken as a means to an ends, it will never stop happening. Because any president who isn't a man of character beyond reproach will inevitably be open to reproach. And men beyond reproach couldn't get elected president anyway.

[TJ in Oregon]

Now I'm just waiting for the "you can't rape your wife" comments to come from you guys.

Opposing abortion = thinking you can't rape your wife?

[TJ in Oregon]

Now I'm just waiting for the "you can't rape your wife" comments to come from you guys.

Opposing abortion = thinking you can't rape your wife?

That's not what and I said and you know it. What I WAS saying was that generally that concept comes from the whole far right Christian morality people that it's marriage and you can't rape your wife generally comes with the views you guys are pushing for.

I honestly have no idea what point you're making here. I know quite a few people who believe in Christian morality and no one who thinks it's impossible for a man to rape his wife. I also don't see how that view results from Christian morality.