@lololulu19 said in What is MORAL?:
Actually, the word "Morality" comes from the word "mores". Mores are mereley behaviors practiced by the majority of society - which is hardly a credbile way to govern one's life. For instance, at various places and times, the majority of populations accepted slavery, bigotry, cannibalism, infanticide, incest, Barbra Streisand, etc.
Indeed - morals are "societally agreed upon acceptable behaviors"... In Greek times, older men had younger boys who "helped" them sexually - though neither orally or anally - the older man would "fuck" the boy between his legs, never penetrating any part of his body (which would have been "unclean"). In Roman times, older men had a collection of younger men and women he could do with as he pleased... even killing them... without legal penalty (the crime of murder only applied to Roman Citizens, not mere slaves!).
The issue with "morals" is not one of society - society's rules change - sometimes quickly (when I started out my professional life, I could have lost my security clearance by simply admitting that I had ever had sexual relations with another male! Now, 35 years later, my employer is not allowed to discriminate against me over the issue - I'm a "protected class" because I suck dick!).
The issue with morals is that some people refuse to follow the "morals" of their times. Even when they know something is wrong, they do it anyway. Children who steal candy - knowing it is wrong - are acting "amorally" (or immorally, if you must)... which takes you to the "strength" of the rules that make up morals:
Is the crime the same if I steal a bottle of water than if I steal a car or an expensive piece of jewelry?
Is the crime the same if the person I kill is "beneath me" - or was trying to kill me - or was an illegal immigrant - or was on my property?
There often are not easy answers there.
A human with a functional brain should realize what is right and what is wrong.
As you just said in your first paragraph: the ideas about what is right vs. wrong are societally put there! While it is fictional, read "The Lord of the Flies" sometime!
For instance, I am not proud of the fact that I eat meat, but I realize that as a human, I must eat meat as sure as I must breathe. We can eat LESS meat, and as fully grown adults are not as dependent upon it, but we need to consume other animal products to develop.
So, depending upon who you ask, eating meat is just part of nature - we (humans) are omnivores - we can subsist on any combination of plants and animals, though we are "healthiest" when we consume a mixture of both.
I know plenty of "vegans" who would argue that eating animal protein at all is "immoral" - and I would disagree with them. A classic case of how individuals can have "morals" that do not agree!
Now, getting to sexuality.
What is sexuality? Frankly, it is overwhelmingly a behavior which elicits pleasure - and even then overwhelmingly in the form of masturbation.
When it comes to genders.. what is worse?
two males stimulating each other - essentially as a form of masturbation - to achieve a sense of pleasure and satisfaction?
OR
a male and female stimulating each other - with the risk of producing an unplanned, unwanted offspring - 24% of which are intentionally aborted in the USA, and quite a few more lost in miscarriages - and quite a few more who are born and neglected, unloved, and unsupported?
I'm with you there! Too many unwanted pregnancies! But I think you'll have a rough time convincing straight men they should be fucking each other solely for the purpose of avoiding unwanted pregnancies!
Mind you: I'm
all-in on trying to convince them!
But let's get something straight here (no pun intended): the desire to have sex (more specifically, to orgasm) is PRIMAL - which is why, when there is no one to have sex with, we do it ourselves! The urge to "get off" is a basic biological one - tied DIRECTLY to the biological drive to procreate!
Still, what "turns you on" is entirely mental - but not on a conscious level (at least, not that we've been able to discern yet!) In general (and I teach my kids this) your body will tell you what you're attracted to: your dick gets hard, your pussy gets moist! You - as an adult human - have to figure out what to do from there!
If you're attracted to boys, find boys who are attracted to you!
If you're attracted to girls, find girls who are attracted to you!
If you're attracted to
both, apply BOTH rules above! 🙂
But keep in mind: your being attracted to someone is only 1/2 the equation! You only have a right (these are morals here!) to ACT on those attractions when the attraction is mutual - and even then, as humans, we also have the right to act counter to our attractions - so there must also be consent!
Also consider that in biblical times, birth control was virtually unavailable other than to take poison risking the death of the woman.
If someone asked JC "I have decided I am going to seek sexual stimulation instead of living my entire life as a virgin. What should I do, have sex with a man which will not result in a child OR have sex with a woman - doing everything possible to avoid a pregnancy - and hoping it does not happen - and if it does, killing or neglecting the baby?
You are trying to impose the morals of THIS society onto a historical figure 2000 years in the past. This isn't then, and then isn't now.
In the times of JC, the bible told you that you must "be fruitful and multiply" - there was no such thing as an "unwanted" child! Children were the PURPOSE!
Biologically speaking, that is exactly right! As with all other animal and plant life - our primary purpose is to procreate the species!
That said, as we've already pointed out - societally, we've come a long way baby! With nearly 8-Billion people on the planet, we can focus on things OTHER than making more people! And that brings into play the whole morality issue again: some religions (societies) continue to believe that it is the moral obligation of every woman to find a husband and to have (and raise) children. Other religions (societies) have other, differing views: that women can have other roles to play, and that we don't really need that many MORE people! (And there are an INFINITE number of other "moral" viewpoints out there - and that's the crux of the matter again: your "morals" may not be the same as my "morals" - they are not universal!
I realize that at certain times with young people in their 20's and 30's, they actually want to have children, and that is wonderful. However, realistically, that motivation for having sex is EXTREMELY RARE.
I suspect you just don't see them... check out your local listings for fertility clinics and OB-GYNs! There are LOTS of people TRYING (in some cases, DESPERATELY TRYING) to have children!
Even then, when this rare motivation for sex IS practiced, that makes women virtual breeding receptacles who spend their entire lives popping out more children and nursing them like cows - without having any other purpose in life other than propagation. Somehow, I don't think women would like to live their lives that way.
Biologically speaking, that is the female role: provide the vessel into which new lives grow, and feed the infants until they can subsist on other foods.
SOCIETALLY, (which, we you've pointed out - that means morally) we have agreed that we're above all that now... but you can't ignore biology either!
Interesting points! 🙂
