Free Articles, Free Web Content, Reprint Articles
Saturday, February 11, 2012
 
Free Articles, Free Web Content, Reprint ArticlesRegisterAll CategoriesTop AuthorsSubmit Article (Article Submission)ContactSubscribe Free Articles, Free Web Content, Reprint Articles

SEND THIS ARTICLE TO A FRIEND


It is doubtless that the theory of Free Love is not unethical. There are, however, still individuals who continue to persist that Free Love is immoral. They have yet to prove a causal relationship. An individual may have multiple partners with which they do many things: chess, jogging, movie going. These are things that people can do together. When they do it together, they do not expect their partner to only do such an action with them only. Sex, as far as our society is concerned, is the only thing which we should limit to one individual. There are few, if any, individual who persist that it is a moral duty for individuals to have only one chess partner, or only one jogging partner. You can be moral without being monogamous. However, there are certain groups which believe that the word "moral" itself means sexually abstinant! Rationalist Humanitarians will admit that being moral means something other than sexuall abstinance; we will admit that being moral constitutes being generous to our fellow men, being kind to our fellow creatures, and always endeavoring for justice.


* Send to:
* Sent by:
* Subject:
* Add your comments:
*Enter the Security Code:
* denotes a required field


Note: This page does not collect e-mail addresses.

Health
Business
Finance
Technology
Travel
Home Repair
Computers
Family
Communication
Entertainment
Marketing
Self Help
Autos
Home Business
ECommerce
Sports
Education
Internet
Other
Law
Partners


Page loaded in 0.074 seconds