(July 16, 2017 at 7:54 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: [quote pid='1586822' dateline='1500233436']
(July 16, 2017 at 3:59 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: It is wrong in my mind because it opens the possibility to hurt for the other half and makes the introduction of sexual diseases more likely.
In fact I know a serial adulteror who explained his reasoning thusly. He weighed the concequences of his actions against the amount of enjoyment he would get and if the fun outweighed the concequences he would fill his boots.
I think what he did was wrong, but he seemed to enjoy it and the women lined up to be the other woman. He was an ex swimwear model for speedo so that may have had something to do with it.
But I'm curious as to what difference a god makes to the situation, how would there being a god be different from there not being one?
Yes, and he is keeping his wife from harm. I'm not arguing that this is moral or not (though I do think it is wrong). Just examining the claim that harm is the basis for morality.
In the area of epistemology (how we know what is right and wrong and is what we are talking about) I don't think it does make that big of a difference. A Christian may point to the scriptures for insight, but I don't see that as a large inequality. Many who don't believe will come to the same conclusion.
[/quote]
How is he keeping her from harm? by hiding the truth that he is increasing the risk of her catching a disease? or by the risk of her finding out somehow and the devastation that could bring to her life?
Or are you suggesting that by hiding the affair he is keeping her from harm when what he would seem to be doing to me is hiding his wrong doing and shielding himself from the concequences he would face.
What you imply is a bit like saying the cover up of fraud was to keep the company from harm.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.