Opposite Sex Housemates

[Winchester]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1334587057' post='2418664']
[font=Segoe UI][color=#282828]It was stated more than once that scandal is relative to a culture, where such culture does not balk at opposite genders living under one roof. Concluding, [/color][/font][color=#282828]opposite[/color][color=#282828] genders living under one r[/color][color=#282828]oof is no problem.[/color][color=#282828] So, if a culture doesn't balk at [/color][color=#282828]adultery, why can't one come to the same conclusion.[/color]
[/quote]
No one argued that adultery was morally neutral.

Try again.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1334587485' post='2418669']
Does that beg the question if willfuly 'creating tinder for sin' is sinful?

I know being tempted is not sinful, per se....but what if you willingly create a situation for temptation? Is that 'willful creation' sinful? If so, is it as dangerous to the soul as the sin itself? or does that even matter?

I really don't know....

(ETA - whoops, meant to get that in after MS's post)
[/quote]If you're moving in with the opposite sex, hoping that proximity and circumstances are going to help you get 'lucky', then I would agree that is sinful, or with bad intent if you agree with the premiss that pre-marital sex is wrong on moral, ethical, or religious grounds.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Anomaly

[Papist]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1334587217' post='2418665']
You are drawing an equivalency between adultery (a sin, as clearly stated in the 10 Commandments and elsewhere) and cohabitation (not a sin in and of itself, as found nowhere in the Bible, Catechism or anywhere else). Hence, the strawman.
[/quote]
[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1334587262' post='2418666']
Because adultery actually IS a sin. There is no sin inherent to 2 people sharing a front door.
[/quote]

Yes. You are both correct, and I agree. However, one may not be able to see the flaw in applying the same logic, especially one that is not well formed.

I am not condemning opposite gender cohabitation. But advocating thought and prudent judgement in doing so.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1334587485' post='2418669']
Does that beg the question if willfuly 'creating tinder for sin' is sinful?

I know being tempted is not sinful, per se....but what if you willingly create a situation for temptation? Is that 'willful creation' sinful? If so, is it as dangerous to the soul as the sin itself? or does that even matter?

I really don't know....

(ETA - whoops, meant to get that in after MS's post)
[/quote]
Well, we are supposed to avoid near occasions of sin, but I don't see how not doing so could be a sin, or it couldn't be a near occasion of sin since it would be a sin. And since a near occasion of sin isn't a sin, I wouldn't think it could be as dangerous to the soul as an actual sin. Obviously, it's not a good idea to create near occasions of sin, and I'm not even saying that living with someone of the opposite sex is a good idea if not married, just that it's not anywhere near the same category as committing adultery, which is clearly sinful.

[kujo]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1334587790' post='2418674']
Yes. You are both correct, and I agree. However, one may not be able to see the flaw in applying the same logic, especially one that is not well formed.

I am not condemning opposite gender cohabitation. But advocating thought and prudent judgement in doing so.
[/quote]

Ah yes. We must be mindful of the dangers of committing one sin whilst deciding whether or not to do something totally different and unsinful. The same principle applies in my work--when I am cutting red peppers, I try to make sure that I am sure to keep the sin of murder at the fore of my senses.

[sixpence]

For those who are worried about scandal, it is also scandalous for a married couple to live in the same house as another single individual. If not, why?

[Papist]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1334587626' post='2418671']
No one argued that adultery was morally neutral.

Try again.
[/quote]
I see. I'll have to take note of this morally neutral stuff. It might come in handy one day.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1334588792' post='2418682']
I see. I'll have to take note of this morally neutral stuff. It might come in handy one day.
[/quote]
Are you usually this passive-aggressive?

[Basilisa Marie]

[quote name='sixpence' timestamp='1334588127' post='2418679']
For those who are worried about scandal, it is also scandalous for a married couple to live in the same house as another single individual. If not, why?
[/quote]

I'd say it depends on the location. In Seattle, certain areas are home to a huge "poly" community, so if you lived near one of those areas, people would be more likely to assume you ARE doing nefarious things. But outside the city, everyone would assume the couple needed the income from their boarder.

[Winchester]

Walking across the street: Morally neutral.

[kujo]

So, let me get this straight.

I have to change my unsinful behavior because other people might sin by assuming that I am sinning?

That's what this "avoiding scandal" business comes down to, right? Jerks who judge make it so that I can't have a roommate of the opposite sex?

This is the sort of BS nonsense that makes me proud to sport the "phishy" tag.

[Winchester]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1334589437' post='2418690']
So, let me get this straight.

I have to change my unsinful behavior because other people might sin by assuming that I am sinning?

That's what this "avoiding scandal" business comes down to, right? Jerks who judge make it so that I can't have a roommate of the opposite sex?

This is the sort of BS nonsense that makes me proud to sport the "phishy" tag.
[/quote]
It can come down to it, yes. In the case of cohabitation, it certainly must be a consideration.

[kujo]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1334589492' post='2418691']
It can come down to it, yes. In the case of cohabitation, it certainly must be a consideration.
[/quote]

Nonsense.

I'm not upset with you, Win. But that is just ridiculous.

[Papist]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1334589198' post='2418687']
Walking across the street: Morally neutral.
[/quote]
Thanks for the tip. Are you usually this opprobrious.

[Winchester]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1334589618' post='2418693']
Nonsense.

I'm not upset with you, Win. But that is just ridiculous.
[/quote]
I don't have a good argument to defend it. Might have a few years ago when I was reading moral theology, but I think you should reflect on it, some more. One cannot be fenced in by fear of scandal from reasonable actions, of course.