Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6695968" data-attributes="member: 4937">To a certain extent I think you are correct.  Certainly, LG and CG will tend to define very different things as being illicit sexuality.   And certainly CN will have a very different definition than LN.  CN we would expect to say something like, "There is no such thing as illicit sexuality.  If it feels good do it.  As long as there is mutual consent, then it's all good."  CN is mostly interested in the freedom of the self to seek what it desires.And without offering my opinion of what CG would say exactly, because when you start defining 'Good' you can't make everyone happy and lots of people bristle, but it would logically not be far different than CN.  It would consider CN only a teeny bit wrong.  But my point is only that for CG, it would still define as wrong any sexuality it saw as destructive because it would still largely agree as to what evil was.  It likely wouldn't have a list of rules to follow, per se, but would judge each act on the basis of whether it was healthy.  And, if it saw that it wasn't healthy for one of the parties, then it would claim it was wrong.  LG by contrast would make a bunch of lists of shalts and shalt nots, and then assert that even if it seemed healthy to engage in something prohibited, it still was not.  The difference here is a difference in perceived remedy to the problem of evil, but very little disagreement over what that problem was.CG would see arguing over which particular acts were wrong as a good example of why making lists was wrong.  And perhaps that's something I sympathize with.But I'm not really interested in getting derailed on the ethics of sexuality, though (sigh) I'm hardly surprised that we seem to be.</blockquote>

Verification