Feminism and porn

Do you support the sale of one's vital organs in such a case?

Should that be legal as well?

I have a moral value set.

What it is, is no concern of yours.

In the same way, your moral value set is not for you to impose on anyone else.

it is an example of other adults' sexual desire/pleasure/habits are none of our business

Do you believe that it is wrong to rape and murder children, and would like the view imposed on others?

Are you making a classical libertarian argument EhBeth?

There is no moral distinction between

1) A person who refuses to help the hypothetical refugee...
2) A person who refuses to help the hypothetical unless she degrades herself sexually.

Whether you believe there is a moral duty to help without any compensation is another question (I happen to believe there is).

Is donation of organs better than sale of organs?

____


I've got an opinion about it, but that doesn't mean I'm going to force it on someone else.

No. I don't.

Children cannot provide consent.

Rape does not involve consent.

Murder does not involve consent.

__

In other words, you're attempting to bait and switch and I'm not playing.

Classical libertarianism is bull.

Moral questions should concern character, virtue and vice.

In this case we would say that this man is bestial, sadistic and degenerate. These traits are properties of this man's character, just as pockets are a property of a coat. He is a vicious human being.

The focus of moral judgment should not really be rights, rules, laws and freedoms, but character.

So you believe raping and murdering children is wrong?

I mean obviously you do think it's immoral. Anyone who isn't insane does. So in that case, what right have you got to impose your moral beliefs on others?

Anyone who disagrees with you is all for rape and killing children?

I think it is immoral to obfuscate as you do.

that is your opinion

it is not a global truth

I think there's a parallel there between going to a refugee and on the one hand saying "do something degrading and I'll help you stay alive", and on the other hand saying "give me one of your two kidneys and I'll help you stay alive." I'm a little tired, so I haven't thought it through completely.

You can talk all you want about "consent" and how someone who's financially destitute consents to things, but I don't know if I'd call it that if they have no choice but to consent or die.

No, it is true. It's got nothing to do with what I think. Such men (and in rarer cases women) are morally corrupt. One does not take advantage of vulnerable teenagers in order to sexually debase them without being a moral void.

The man in the example is a sick ************.

Most of us understand that some porn is completely horrible and are not pro all that.

You jump to that all porn is, and you, frankly, sound like an idiot. Ms. Purissima.

Right. That's, like, your opinion and stuff.

There is a big difference between medical ethics, and sexual ethics. I suppose you could argue that the issue is "charitable" ethics, but even so, medical ethics is different.

Removing a kidney is a medical procedure that involves a doctor (a profession bound by ethics) and a real risk of breaking an oath of the profession (first do no harm). Covering oneself in feces is a sexual fetish that some people do willingly for enjoyment.

I don't think you can compare the two.

[And still my main point that the moral failing in the hypothetical is the refusal to give help to the refugee (not the request for a sexual favor). Refusing to help period is just as immoral as refusing to help unless a sexual act is performed.]

I think you should cancel your subscription, or if the guys aren't hot enough get a new provider hon.

Porn and the regulation of it have nothing to do with what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms. Porn could cease to exist yet consenting couples would be free to continue getting as freaky as they please.