Debate Guide: It's wrong because it's illegal: Difference between revisions
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Authority Appeal.png|thumb|Appeal to authority]] | [[File:Authority Appeal.png|thumb|Appeal to authority]] | ||
<blockquote><font color="green">'''''Adult-minor sex is wrong, period | <blockquote><font color="green">'''''Adult-minor sex is wrong, period! <u>Most societies rightly condemn and criminalize it</u>, so how can it be OK?'''''</font></blockquote> | ||
According to your very basic legalistic morality, gay sex has gone from being 'wrong' to 'more/totally acceptable' in a number of recent societies, as the laws changed and were eventually equalized. Gay sex would also be wrong in some present societies that outlaw it, but not elsewhere! If the circular reasoning of "illegal = wrong = illegal" was a vaild argument, all forms of deregulation would automatically be immoral | Nothing is wrong just because it's illegal, and besides, [[Age of Consent|ages of consent]] are highly variable geographically and over time. This is because law is an evolving system of codified moral standards, which vary according to the place on earth, time in history, and on whether or not laws are used. Laws, being written before the act and involving nothing more than subjective judgments, have no ethical authority over the rightness of any practice. One example that demonstrates this is [[Wikipedia:Miscegenation|miscegnation]], but lets instead cover gay sex: | ||
According to your opponent's very basic legalistic morality, gay sex has gone from being 'wrong' to 'more/totally acceptable' in a number of recent societies, as the laws changed and were eventually equalized. Gay sex would also be wrong in some present societies that outlaw it, but not elsewhere! If the circular reasoning of "illegal = wrong = illegal" was a vaild argument, all forms of deregulation would automatically be immoral and irresponsible. There would be no acceptable reason for the legalization of any human behavior; i.e. we would all be living in an authoritarian dictatorship by the time a few governments had been given the chance to outlaw their freedoms and vices of choice. | |||
==Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered== | ==Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered== | ||
Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
Wikipedia: | Wikipedia: | ||
*[[Wikipedia:Is–ought problem|Is–ought problem]] - Proponents of this argument | *[[Wikipedia:Is–ought problem|Is–ought problem]] - Proponents of this argument show a general inability to distinguish is from ought statements. | ||
[[Category:Debate]][[Category:Debating Points: Sociological]][[Category:Debating Points: Adult-Minor sex]] | [[Category:Debate]][[Category:Debating Points: Sociological]][[Category:Debating Points: Adult-Minor sex]] |
Latest revision as of 21:37, 9 April 2024
Adult-minor sex is wrong, period! Most societies rightly condemn and criminalize it, so how can it be OK?
Nothing is wrong just because it's illegal, and besides, ages of consent are highly variable geographically and over time. This is because law is an evolving system of codified moral standards, which vary according to the place on earth, time in history, and on whether or not laws are used. Laws, being written before the act and involving nothing more than subjective judgments, have no ethical authority over the rightness of any practice. One example that demonstrates this is miscegnation, but lets instead cover gay sex:
According to your opponent's very basic legalistic morality, gay sex has gone from being 'wrong' to 'more/totally acceptable' in a number of recent societies, as the laws changed and were eventually equalized. Gay sex would also be wrong in some present societies that outlaw it, but not elsewhere! If the circular reasoning of "illegal = wrong = illegal" was a vaild argument, all forms of deregulation would automatically be immoral and irresponsible. There would be no acceptable reason for the legalization of any human behavior; i.e. we would all be living in an authoritarian dictatorship by the time a few governments had been given the chance to outlaw their freedoms and vices of choice.
Fallacies and cognitive distortions covered
See also, our dedicated article:
- Appeal to authority.
- Circulus in probando fallacy: The reasoning behind this argument is a fallacious circular ("We know it is wrong because it was made illegal because it's wrong").
- Cognitive distortion: Musturbation.
See also
Wikipedia:
- Is–ought problem - Proponents of this argument show a general inability to distinguish is from ought statements.