What are your thoughts on this ethical dilemma regarding discrepancies between belief and behavior?

I don’t see an ethical dilemma at all. Simply because I don’t think a behavior is morally wrong, does not mean I should be required to indulge in it, it just means I have no problem with others doing it.

Because they don’t choose to.

There is no ethical dilemma.

No, there’s no ethical dilemma at all. The point is that you are free to do these activities, not that you have to do them.

I’m guessing that most people on fluther have very little problem with homosexuality. I my self am a heterosexual man, and while I fully support peoples right to have gay sex and form relationships with who they like, homosexuality is simply not for me.

Likewise, I believe all drugs should be legal, however you will never find me sticking a needle in my arm. It’s just not for me. I have tried most other drugs, and am now clean cause none of them are for me.

For the most part it is a question of taste, how can I smoke cannabis and condemn someone for shooting up heroin? it’s a bit like chowing down on a bell pepper while calling anyone who likes chilly peppers sick deviants.

So, It really just comes down to choice and prefference.

Having said that, when you take my support of gays and lack of gay sex, my support of drugs and lack of drug use, and all the other things, from recycling to gambling and everything in between, you do begin to have some what of a point. All be it a very etherial and loose point, a big picture point if you will.

I don’t eat asparagus because I hate the taste. Does that undermine my credibility when I claim you should be free to eat it as much as you’d like? It seems not. Similarly, the reason I do not drink is because I am completely uninterested in alcohol. I do not think there is anything morally wrong with it. Liking something and accepting the fact that other people might like it are two different things.

Ah, I see @poisonedantidote basically beat me to it.

I don’t see a dilemma here. I agree with @JilltheTooth . I may not want to do something just because I don’t want to do it, but still believe that there is nothing wrong with it.

I am pro choice, but you won’t see me going around getting abortions all the time.
Just because I feel that people should be allowed to do something doesn’t mean that I actually have to do so.

@SavoirFaire My dragon style is supperior to your tiger style, you can not defeat me!

@Mariah I am with you. I am concerned that I am enabling others, by not expressing my unhappiness with their choices (I am thinking of my children here), but I also want to be seen as a forgiving and tolerant Christian. I hope to guide by example, not by personal outrage.

There’s no moral dilemma, except perhaps that they might not have experience with what the “lifestyles” they are discussing actually entail.

Allowing other people to do what they want, is fine, as far as it goes.

What’s missing is perhaps that sometimes there may be unhealthy or traumatizing things going on, that aren’t with the behavior per se, but may tend to go along with it circumstantially, particularly when people aren’t really as developmentally healthy as they pretend to themselves and/or others that they are, and sometimes “interesting” sexual behavior may be used as a mask or a shield or a distraction or a way of acting out, or a power issue, or some other form of codependent or otherwise dysfunctional relationship.

For example, maybe very advanced people can have unattached sexual relations with ten people in one day, and have it be a healing experience for everyone. But it could also be that some or all of those people are doing it for unhealthy reasons, and are retraumatizing themselves, or whatever, and if any of them are withholding that they may be infected with an STD, it might spread disease, which may end up harming others… which, back to the original question, is harming others, and isn’t about the behavior itself, but may tend to be hidden and more common in behavior that is outside “the norm.”

Having said all that though, all of that abusive and unhealthy stuff probably also happens just as often or more so, depending on how you measure, in all kinds of socially-deemed “regular” sexual relationships, as well as non-sexual relationships, etc.

Which brings us back to, “no, there is no moral dilemma.”

No.

Choosing ones own way while being tolerant, open minded, about others choices does not a hypocrite make.

No, of course there’s no ethical dilemma. It’s about people making their own moral and ethical choices. I make mine, you are free to make yours and I will not try to impose my moral and ethical beliefs on you.

Lifestyle choices are based on many factors:: personality, values, and moral sense being the major ones. How I view your lifestyle kind of depends on which of these is implicated

I recognize that there are all kinds of personalities, so it seems perfectly natural that that will manifest in different lifestyle choices.

I feel a little more strongly about my values. It’s less easy to be accepting of someone who’s values are radically different from mine. I see this especially in the political arena, for example. But I will definitely try.

Ethics/morals are different. My morals (and those of most people, I think) are based on the simple premise that it’s wrong to intentionally cause harm to others. When I see someone disregard this, then yes, I will judge them. They need to change that behavior.

What they said.

I’m wondering if you’re trying to get at something different, though—maybe you don’t think there’s an ethical dilemma, but you think that maybe these people don’t really mean what they say? I.e., they claim to think drinking is ok, but if they aren’t drinking, do they really believe that?

So, for those of you who say that there is no dilemma because the viewpoint is that a person is free to do things, but that doesn’t mean they have to do those things, I have another question. Does this imply that what you really approve of is only freedom of choice? Is it possible that you don’t truly approve of the ethics of other people’s lifestyles, but you believe they should be free to choose to live that way anyway? If you truly believe that living differently is 100% equally as valid as the way you choose to live, then what criteria are you using that causes you to live the way you live and not the way other people live?

Just for the record, I am being devil’s advocate here for the sake of discussion. I essentially agree with all of you.

In answer to your second question: Are you familiar with the works of Epictetus? He was a rather thoughtful fellow. It is from his works and some odd Tantric Buddhist works I draw my thoughts on these matters – filtered through a long and mis-spent youth. :)

Ron Paul says it best

No. The key ingredient is that nobody is getting hurt by another’s actions. That is what they call laissez-faire. It is as moral a philosophy as you can follow.

Needless to say, a person’s lifestyle is their own. It may not be liked by the family or the public, but that is what freedom is all about.

Each day, I think we all see more and more permissivness in our society. Acceptance is becoming an accepted word. Like, a girl is pregnant and not married. I have been through this with my daughter. It was taboo in earlier years, but today, it’s just another part of acceptance and life.

Good question. jp

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies That’s a great clip!

Gadzooks, I think off your question there are two legs to this beast. You have those who say certain behavior is OK, as long as no one gets hurt, don’t really see why the ‘anyone gets hurt’ qualifier is there. However, merely saying something is OK is not quite the same as advocating, that is the loophole people can use to say ”I won’t contest their lifestyle BUT I wont be doing it”. If they truly championed it, they would have no compunction living it. They would do it naturally, as a part of living not say I should be compelled to do it in order for me to be doing it. If a person of faith uses that modus operandi, they get labeled a hypocrite. Striping the logic down to the bone, they are really just acquiescing that a certain behavior is ok “for them to do” but it is really not good; hence, why they themselves are not doing it. I acquiesce to behavior and such I would never do. Some I may find appalling but since it is legal because the masses deem it to be, I have to float with the logic of that is how the world works in their secular ideology. I guess that comes down to the real meat of your question is do the people who say certain things are OK and support it, or are they merely not going to contest it?

There are so very many choices of lifestyle and activity that calling someone hypocritical for not living each and every way of which they approve is just silly.

@Mariah, are you feeling like you personally might not be as ok with drinking/casual sex as you might claim to be?

@nikipedia It’s odd because I wouldn’t judge another person for a second based on those things, but I think if I myself were to sleep around, I would feel guilty about it. I don’t know why I’m holding a different standard to myself than I do to others, and yes, it does make me wonder a bit if my mind is really as open about these lifestyles as I think it is. But I don’t worry about it much, because as everyone seems to agree in this discussion, there is no ethical problem with living life as I choose and feeling content to let other people live life as they choose, which is how I operate. I think sleeping around wouldn’t personally make me happy, and that is why I don’t do it – not because I think there’s something terribly wrong about it, but because it wouldn’t make me happy. If it makes someone else happy, then that’s great. I guess my concern is….why would it make me unhappy? Because deep down I believe it’s wrong?

I don’t see an ethical dilemma at all. I truly believe that consenting adults should be able to do what they want as long as they aren’t hurting anybody (and that means emotionally, psychologically, financially, or by fraud, or physically, or by withoholding someone’s due).

I don’t have romantic/sexual relationships with females, because I’m not gay. I don’t get involved in “open relationships” or relationships where there are more people involved other than me and my SO because I know for certain that I would definitely get hurt by that type of a relationship. I’m not into what some people would call kinky stuff, just because it’s not of interest to me. I would never sleep around or have casual sex, because for me, that would be upsetting and painful for me. That’s all.

I think you’re making an issue where there is none.

I believe squash should be grown, sold and consumed by anyone who enjoys it. I personally can’t stand squash. I find it revolting. Is that some kind of “ethical dilemma”?

No.

I just don’t like squash.

The same could be said for the acceptance of lifestyle choices people don’t choose for themselves.

In the abstract, no, there is no moral dilemma. It’s fine to be okay with others doing something even if you don’t wish to do it yourself. That being said, I do think there are people who claim to be okay with things but are really not. Its sort of “in vogue” to be okay with all sorts of things and so people follow along with that.

People with allergies/celiacs avoid the foods they have to but they often express regret about it. Generally, people who aren’t law enforcement officers don’t carry guns around at work. Some people drink and get drunk so fast that they limit their consumption of alcohol because they know they can’t handle it.

I think what you’re touching on with these thoughts is the fact that what is moral for the individual isn’t necessarily what is moral for everyone else. If behaving a certain way has negative effects for the individual but not for anyone else, it’s moral for that individual to avoid behaving that way.. but it’s not necessarily moral for anyone else to behave that way.

In the reverse, if one kid has a severe peanut allergy, it’s moral to serve peanut butter sandwiches to all the kids except for that one.

To add to @roundsquare‘s comments: Some people merely permit others to make the decisions they want to make while still holding that it’s unethical/immoral for those others to engage in that activity. For example, health-freaks who will begrudgingly take you through the mcdonalds drive thru, complaining the whole way about how bad it is for you.

@Mariah

“If you truly believe that living differently is 100% equally as valid as the way you choose to live, then what criteria are you using that causes you to live the way you live and not the way other people live?”

Well, what I believe is that we are free to do whatever we want as long as it harms no other innocent sentient beings. The key here is “whatever we want.” I don’t want to drink alcohol or smoke marijuana. I don’t want to go to bars, watch television, or read People magazine. But other people do, and as long as they harm no one it’s their right to do so.

I suppose this is a bit like the free speech mantra – I might not like what you say but I defend your right to say it. I think that the answers people have given are mainly that it is people’s choice to behave in certain ways and our choice to behave differently and that we defend their right to behave how they want. But I think the dilemma that @Mariah is saying is why do we not want to behave that way? It definitely isn’t as simplistic as not liking a certain food or not having gay sex when you are straight. Maybe it’s more like being ok with eating horse meat or sparrows when you have chosen to be vegetarian.

I take the view that anyone who wants to try skydiving, eat snails, tattoo their faces, or listen to talk radio is welcome to, even though I have no desire to do those things myself. Must I do them in order to prove I’m not a hypocrite? I don’t think so. I see no moral dilemma here. “Declining” and “refusing” are not the same thing.

The way I see it is—there are things that are “right” for some people, and other things that are “right” for me. What’s right for me doesn’t have to be right for them, and vice versa.

But, I respect their right to do what’s right for them. I expect the same in return, but that part’s less reliable…

@Mariah No, I do not merely approve of the freedom of choice. Just because someone makes a choice I wouldn’t (say, to get a tattoo) doesn’t mean I think the choice is bad. It means that it doesn’t fit with my overall scheme of preferences. Not bad ≠ good and not good ≠ bad. While some things may be good and other things may be bad, many are just neutral: it’s not wrong to do them, and it’s not wrong not to do them. But if may be good for you to do them even while not being good for me to do them. You might go crazy without a pet cat, whereas I would die with one in the house due to my allergies.

Moreover, there are sometimes multiple ways to do good things. Staying healthy is typically a good thing, but I might choose to do so in a different way than a friend. So I could still think that what my friend is doing is good even thought I wouldn’t choose it for myself if what I think is good is that s/he is staying healthy and what I wouldn’t choose for myself is that particular way of staying healthy.

“how can I smoke cannabis and condemn someone for shooting up heroin?”

That’s the way most people view marijuana (a natural substance used without additives) along with heroin (an eventual processed chemically induced substance). We all have a choice, let’s try not to compare things we know nothing about. I still smoke pot ocassionally and I’m telling you, as a relaxer it beats the crap out of cigarettes. You wanna go beyond relax? Then choose those (real) drugs that are chemically induced.