I think the hypothetical doesn’t have much to do with morality. There is no moral reason not to. But there are other reasons.
Actions don’t have to be immoral for them to be judged or questioned. People who’d have sex with a dead deer aren’t hurting anyone, but they are making choices that would ordinarily lead one to be sceptical of them as a person and be weary of other choices they might have made you are not aware of and if the choices they will make in the future.
wary*
Is that the best argument you’ve got, my god fearing friend?
^(non-native speakers are gone non-native speak. Appreciate the correction, but people make mistakes on the internet all the time. It’s quite a job to take on to correct all of them.)
Well the living deer run too fast.
I don’t think so
The argument the joker Garfield is trying to make is that, in a standard proof format, can you define your ethics in an axiomatic system? He thinks that’s important, and it is to a degree, but our intuition also tells us details about reality that our pure logic brain is ignorant of. Pure logic makes the Borg. Pure intuition stays in Eden, being as Lilith was. Logic and intuition together make the Federation of Star Trek.
I’m not talking morals with someone who has a moral codex from 2000 years ago.
I’ll never get over the slavery angle. Like, right after delivering your people from generations of slavery would have been the perfect opportunity to go “We’re not doing that shit again.”
No no you don’t get it, God had to allow slavery because there was no way the humans in that time would put up with not having slaves. He had to make some concessions. Telling everyone to cut off their baby’s foreskin though, that’s fair game
Getting any part of one’s body inside a dead carcass has nothing to do with morals…. It’s fucking DISGUSTING! Remember that piece of meat is currently being eaten and digested by billions of bacterias. All eating and defecating everywhere inside and out… flies have burrowed eggs in it, worms are crawling everywhere, and all this is releasing toxic gases from all the rotting and digesting…. Also all the sphincters have released so the bowels are leaking out …! Nope…nope….nope….!!!
Remember that piece of meat is currently being eaten and digested by billions of bacterias. All eating and defecating everywhere inside and out… flies have burrowed eggs in it, worms are crawling everywhere, and all this is releasing toxic gases from all the rotting and digesting
A proper Appalachia Orgy
Excuse me what
Putting aside the “why the hell would you want to do that?” aspect, let’s assume that you’re the guy in the picture and you do. It would be morally wrong even if the deer were alive because a non-human animal cannot give consent. It’s wrong after it’s dead because it’s disrespectful to the deer, which was once a living being. Don’t need religion to understand that.
I don’t think you’ll get consensus on the “it’s disrespectful” reasoning. It might not be inherently religious (although most religions I’m aware of expand upon it to specific procedures or prohibitions) but “respecting” the vessel which once contained a life seems very much tied up in sentimentality and woowoo more than sound reasoning or pragmatism. It’s just engrained into social norms at this point but, purely speculation, burial and burning were probably done for the same reasons other animals do it - you don’t attract other predators or suffer the scent of death inviting maggots, flies and other vectors for disease. It probably became more ritualistic and religious over time. If I’m dead someone can dangle my lads from their rearview like a pair of fuzzy dice for all I care - which will be not at all because I’m dead.
It’s wrong after it’s dead because it’s disrespectful to the deer, which was once a living being.
But people eat the deer with zero moral qualms. Are you really going to tell me that yanking something’s skin off, cracking its bones, gouging out its internal organs, and processing its meat into sausages for roasting is a sign of respect?
If the animal represents your only available food source, consuming it is required to continue living.
You aren’t going to die if you fail to rape a dead animal, but you might if you fail to eat one.
For how many people do you think animals are the only viable food source? How many in this thread? Like 10%? Sure hope anyone with options therefore doesn’t…
is it true that anyone rich enough to eat deer meat need it, or any kind of meat at that, to survive?
well, why is it we should disrespect? don’t give me wrong, i agree hat we should respect, but many customs of respect like this one seem to have origins nearly as arbitrary as faith
I mean there are evolutionary reasons most humans feel disgust towards things, in this case mainly the spread of disease. If none of these were problems, there isn’t really a good moral case to be made against it unless you believe in some sort of afterlife.
Well, religion is morally bankrupt.
The god of the Bible never condemns slavery, and Jesus speaks of eternal punishment for finite crimes, to give a couple of examples.
It’s like that book is used to engineer the culture, which is our operating system. Hey, lemme just make sure of something; are you aware that the New Testament describes a decentralized autonomous organization of secret police at an eighth grade reading level? The shit that’s encoded in that good book is what makes the police state about two thousand years old. But you know Trump and Epstein and the Clintons and Hunter Biden are all cops, right? You’re not retarded because you are so attached to your identity that you can’t see what is intentionally “hidden?”
“Occult” literally just means “hidden.” What don’t you know?
Take your schizo pills, bud. We’ll all be out in the garage playing foosball.
Listen, momma ain’t right all of the time. I KNOW it’s a time to open a case of whoop-ass and my ass knows I can do it! I can do it all night long! But that’s just what the prophets say.
I grew up in a very cultist region, and I remember having similar arguments at 8-13 years old already. Well, not about corpse fucking but murder and such. When I made the same argument, “I’m currently murdering as many people as I want which is 0”, the holier than thou counter-argument always was “well that’s only because you grew up in a Christian culture even if you’re now deciding to not believe!” Which often wasn’t just that, it often went further into pretty racist assumptions that if I was like a “wild human living somewhere in Africa”, I’d be murdering and eating human meat… That tells quite a lot about the whole love-thy-neighbor act I think.
And this wasn’t somewhere in the 70’s, it was in the 2000-2010.
That’s THE BEST ?
Fucking hell…
If the only reason you aren’t a necrophiliac rapist is because your god says not to, you are not a good person, you are a necrophiliac rapist on a leash.
Sorry what exactly are you raping. Is fucking a couch or flesh light rape now? Its dead it is a piece of meet nothing more unless you think its soul is their or something. And no I don’t want to fuck a dead deer bit calling it rape is just odd.
Everyone needs to remember that
That dirty doe, I’d make her hooves curl.
Its not, you do you, friend. I don’t think your god cares either. Follow your bliss.
Just, um, let me get far enough I don’t need to see/hear it, and I will never eat venison from you again.
That’s the thing that bothers me about religious people, the only thing stopping the lot of them from committing heinous crimes is the fear of eternal damnation. It’s like they have no morals at all.
If it’s actually stopping them, I will support their continuing to believe.
Look at your “religious” politicians. It is just a tool to control the stupid they don’t believe in any of it.
Some of them don’t. Even facing “eternal damnation”, they’ll still commit terrible crimes.
