3 ms·
because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they want together Why? This strikes me as a very shallow moral principle. As 'presscast notes it
by blfr 8y ago
because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they want together
Why? This strikes me as a very shallow moral principle. As 'presscast notes it completely misses the point of the nature of a life well-lived.
Ironically, in practice it goes against human nature. Atomized society of people passing each other indifferently is certainly freer in some sense but it's also lonely and depressing for many of its members. It goes directly against our most basic needs for social belonging.
- trhway 8y ago>>because we should, by default, let consenting adults do what they want together >Why? This strikes me as a very shallow moral principle. that is a circular argument as morals are the behaviors that society allows consenting adults to engage in. Wrt. [un]naturality based arguments - there is nothing natural about humans using smartphones, flying in airplanes, etc. yet billions of people shamelessly engage in those unnatural activities everyday. We're way past natural... Why are we so hellbent about whether it is natural or unnatural of how some people enjoy each other company?
- nemo1618 8y agoThe modern emphasis on individualism is understandable as a reaction to the collectivism of the past. But as usual, we over-corrected. So now we're entering a period of reaction against individualism. We'll almost certainly over-correct again, but it won't be as severe. "Progress" is not a straight line, it's an attenuated wave.
- jessaustin 8y agoIt's depressing to contemplate, but this prediction might be correct...
- meruru 8y agoBecause why not? They are not hurting anybody so let them have fun.
- peteretep 8y agoLife, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are unalienable rights in at least one well-known country. Being able to bang who you want (assuming they feel the same way) presumably falls under the third?
- solidsnack9000 8y agoWhy? This strikes me as a very shallow moral principle. So true -- but here we are talking about it as a legal principle. It's about what the government can't do, not about what people should do.