Quote:
|
SANTORUM: You have the problem within the church. Again, it goes back to this moral relativism, which is very accepting of a variety of different lifestyles. And if you make the case that if you can do whatever you want to do, as long as it's in the privacy of your own home, this "right to privacy," then why be surprised that people are doing things that are deviant within their own home? If you say, there is no deviant as long as it's private, as long as it's consensual, then don't be surprised what you get. You're going to get a lot of things that you're sending signals that as long as you do it privately and consensually, we don't really care what you do. And that leads to a culture that is not one that is nurturing and necessarily healthy.
|
Am I the only one that dislikes the term "moral relativism?" It just seems like morals are relative by nature. The Spanish Inqusition were following their moral code after all. The use of this term fell like it's pigeon holing the idea. As well as suggesting that it's wrong, in context...
Wow, if you're gay you are inherently non-nurturing it seems. Huh, I've met some gay guy's that I thought were awfully girly about trying to take care of everything and everyone. I realize that this isn't nurturing per se, but I do think it's related. Go figure.
I would agree that if you let people do whatever they want in private then they will. Often times it'll be something that I'd not want to be involved with in any way. I just don't see why I should I assume that my way is noble and theirs is wrong. Even if my way is traditional that doesn't make it "right". It just makes it traditional. At one point human sacrifice was traditional. Doesn't mean it's the way to go? 'Sides, there's a lot of homosexual activity in history and it hasn't destroyed the Earth yet.
Hey Griff, for the record I wasn't intentionaly misunderstanding him, I was just being a dick about not accepting "Facts" which were actually opinions. Even if I agreed with the opinion. I'm not the only one either.