Hi Chrissy. Thanks for the engagement. I read your article. When someone says the classic Christian sex ethic means "you're just trying to control our bodies" or "people's lives are on the line" we need to realize what is really going on. Respectfully (and you are so kind!)-1/3
-we have two different visions of what leads to joy and thriving for human beings. We are each contending for our vision of "The Good" and opposing those visions we think are harmful. By telling people they should not believe in a creator God who made us for sex only inside 2/3
marriage, is to urge them to adopt YOUR version of "the Good" rather than mine. I’m telling them they should hold this view of "The Good." Let's be honest (and I think you mostly are) about what we are both trying to do. Again, I appreciate your engagement. 3/3
@timkellernyc Thanks for reading and for your gracious response, Tim. The evidence of human experience and recognition that we’re all in the same boat in one sense—being thrust into this world with consciousness to face our mortality—as a basis for secular ethics
@timkellernyc In my view, your deontological ethics is as unconvincing as the metaphysics from which you derive it. I don’t depend on metaphysics for my understanding of what constitutes healthy sexuality. I look at concrete realities—and your narrow sexual ethic has destroyed many lives
@C_Stroop Hi Chrissy - First, I think you misread my ethics. They aren’t really deontological or classical ‘virtue ethics’. Best example of them is Edwards’ “The Nature of True Virtue”.
@C_Stroop Second, you probably do understand and reject my metaphysics. But again, I think yours are mistaken too. I think your teaching has bad effects on people as you think mine does. But I see nothing but good motives in you. I think that was my point all along.
