lesser of two evils

[Guest Aluigi]

No it is not OK. Having sex outside of marriage is evil. There are only certain conditions under which sex is right and good, and that is within marriage open to the possibility of God's Creative Power. It's not that the word "rape" is used or not. With the killing example, ok i won't use murder, just killing. killing justly, or in self defense, is good. killing unjustly is evil.

GOOD- just killing BAD- unjust killing
GOOD- marriage in marriage BAD- marriage outside marriage
GOOD- keeping evil objects out of the hand of people who have no right to own them BAD- taking objects away from their legitimate owners

We're going in circles here. I'm saying that there are conditions for each of these morally neutral actions that would either make them GOOD or BAD.

[dairygirl4u2c]

I don't think I am going in circles here. I am trying to get you to explain how something normally bad such as killing can be good, and how something normally bad such as premarital sexual relations cannot ever be good.

The only distinctions I see is that the Catholic Church has said that killing can sometimes be justified. As for the stealing thing, this would seem allowable athough less explicitly. I make that judgement as a former Catholic. The premarital sexual relations thing has never been possibly allowed, from my experience; the Catholic Church has always said no premarital sexual relatinos whatsoever ever is good.

It seems that even the Catholic Church might grudgingly admit that there may be cases where it's good. These hypotheicals are just so far out there that it's never considered. That means that you should reconsider what you're basing your statements on.

So anyway you have not shown how, beyond the normative notions of the Catholic Church, how one thing that's normally bad such as killing is different than norammly bad premarital when trying to do good when nothing else will work. It seems that all you're doing is saying "this is good and this is bad". I want you to explain the differences in philosohpyical terms, a proof so to speak, not just making those kind of statements.

Edited November 2, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[Guest Aluigi]

because you're specifying a type of sex, premarital. that type of sex is evil. just like a type of killing, murder, is evil. just like a type of taking, theft, is evil. sex is good in some cases. killing is good in some cases. taking is good in some cases.

[dairygirl4u2c]

Again, I hope you are not confusing the words with the actions. Premarital actually means just that, premarital. I am not implying that the sex occured in a knowing open evil act for the sake of itself. I am arguing that the sex happened in the context of the only way to stop an evil.

I'll ask it simply. If I have to clarify again I will. You said that killing can be done when it is the only way to stop an evil so why can't sex be used when it is the only way to stop an evil? (as in my hypothetical)

[Guest Aluigi]

sex cannot stop an evil outside of marriage. ever. provide any coherent example that proposes that it could and we'll continue the talk, but so far you've been unable to provide a coherent example. sex outside of marriage is always harmful and unbeneficial, ALWAYS. but sex itself, which is not just a word but in actuality the general action with two types, either inside or outside of marriage. just like with killing, it is only just within the context of a just authority taking action intending only to do good but killing in the process. sex must be in the context of a marriage and open to life and unitive.