There are people who think homosexual acts are immoral, and there are people who don't think that they are. That's fine, people can disagree. But why does the debate have to become so hateful from both sides? Is it so hard to put yourself in the other person's shoes and try to examine their argument from their perspective? I can understand why someone might think that it is not immoral, but I disagree, that's all. It's like drug control. Some people think marijuana use should be illegal except in rare medical cases (using pills, not cigarette smoke), and some people simply don't think drug abuse is immoral. Some people think polygamy is immoral, and some people think that it is perfectly acceptable, because the people involved are all consenting adults. Others believe that just because something is voluntary that does not make it ethical or moral.
No matter where you stand, is it possible to debate the other side without using ad hominem attacks like "sinner" and "homophobe"?
2006-09-13
16:52:25
·
15 answers
·
asked by
askthepizzaguy
4
in
Civic Participation