Interesting post. You contributed a lot, appreciate that.
So basically, everything is a matter of choice. Choices that are cause and effect, which determine your position and role in society.
If I kill someone tonight, it’s not right or wrong, just cause and effect?
Nicely put.
Inspiring post IMO.
I should add (missed the edit window) that if, indeed, this is it and there is nothing else, then we, humans, are the highest authority, and so our subjective understanding of “good” and “bad” are actually sort of the final word on the matter, wouldn’t you say? (Obviously ignoring the possibility of extraterrestial life forms more advanced or as advanced and simply holding different viewpoints, of course…but it’s too damn late/early to get into extraterrestial philosophy ;))
The only other thing which could possibly trump our views or result in any consequences beyond those we impose upon ourselves (through suffering or social penalty) would be a God/non-physical realm.
Therefore, the subjective, “meaningless” distinctions WE make between good and bad, right and wrong are the ONLY ones which matter or could possibly HAVE any meaning.
If nothing really matters, then we get to decide what we pretend does based on how well it works for us or not. Does that make any sense? 
No, it **is **(most likely) wrong… the problem is that right and wrong only have meaning in a cultural context. The act is either acceptable or unacceptable, based on how society views it. Morality itself is fluid depending on time an place… even today, in the US in certain situations it’s acceptable; war, self-defense… accident.
Kill someone tonight by dropping a hammer when you’re working on your roof, it’s an accident.
Kill someone today who’s trying to kill you, it’s self-defense.
Kill someone today just for fun, it’s murder.
Kill someone today that’s breaking into your house, it’s either self-defense (in states with castle doctrine laws), or a murder (in some degree in those states that don’t)
Kill an indian in the early 1800’s, it’s pest control and you get a reward.
Kill a slave in ancient Rome, it’s destruction of property.
The act itself doesn’t change (you causing the death of another human), the “wrongness” of the act changes based on time, location, and circumstances.
Desmond Morris thinks we have sex in private so jealously doesn’t tear our little tribes apart. But he has a lot of funny ideas so take that with a grain of salt.
In direct response to the OP: Sex is a big deal because sex leads to pregnancy and having babies, and that’s a big deal. At least, in the absence of reliable birth control you run that risk, and our “instinctual” attitudes and taboos toward sex were built into us long before reliable birth control became available.
And compared to other animals, human babies require a lot more time and care before they become mature and self-sufficient.
Also unlike other animals, human beings think about the future consequences of their actions.
For the record, I do believe in the existence of an objective morality, and in God, but I what I wrote above is just as relevant if you don’t.
Except that in previous societies, child molestation was ok (I think there is actually still an island tribe today where it is practiced), and rape was a normal part of warfare.
Treating modern morals as eternal truths is myopic at best.
I think instincts play a larger role than the social aspect.
I think the OP’s question answers itself. We make a big deal about sex because we’re animals.
More specifically, we’re animals that have a long gestation period and an extremely long period of dependence upon parents.
These factors mean that the same evolutionary forces that have gifted us with a desire for sex, sensitive organs that can give us orgasms etc, have given us certain apprehensions about just screwing anyone, as well as pair-bonding instincts.
All this is particularly true for women, since screwing around would have been a successful strategy for many of our male ancestors.
Now, I know that a lot of people don’t like evolutionary descriptions like the one above, but I think it’s because they will interpret it as making a value judgement. I’m not doing that.
The woman I’ve had strongest feelings for in my life was bisexual, reviewed sex toys for a magazine, and we had an open relationship. I’m no prude.
But, the whole dating and mating game is pretty much dictated by how attraction works in women.
We’ve existed as a species for about 200,000 years. During most of that time, when our social system evolved, we didn’t think we were just another animal. And the fact is, most of still don’t think we aren’t.
It’s only the last 200 years or so that we’ve begun to understand that we’re just another animal. Some of us understand that, but not most of us.
I don’t see what the mystery is…
As for killing people, groups whose moral code considered it “no big deal” to kill another person would tend to die out pretty quickly.
Pink Majik Trix, when you need to shit, do you just squat wherever you happen to be and do it?
Pink Majik Trix, you’re kind of easy, aren’t you?
In Science’s interest, I propose myself as a test subject, and the experiment is mating with Kari Byron.
Like Sunday morning he is.
Easy?
That’s a matter of opinion.
But I am dope!
does that help?
First of all, we are not animals. To enter the library where I’m typing this post, I had to walk through a door labeled “No animals allowed”. I can see others entering the door as I speak. I feel safe in predcting that you, John Mace, and even the members of PETA have walked through many such doors. So I can safely conclude that, though some people claim to be “just animals”, none of them actually believe it to be true. Humans are not animals.
As for why sex is a such a big deal, it’s because common sense dictates that sex should be a big deal. Many groups throughout history have tried out a social system wherein sex can be practiced between any two persons without legal or social penalty or personal guilt. It happened in various cults in Ancient Greece and Rome, in fringe American communities such as those run by Isaac Bullard and John Noyes, in the hippy communes of the 60’s, and in many other places. The result is always the same: these societies quickly collapse. Free and uninhibited sex has been shown over and over to be a bad idea.
Some say that it has something to do with procreation, but it does not. It’s easy to have sex in a way that carries no risk of procreation, but that doesn’t make the free love ideal any more plausible. The problem with that ideal has nothing to do with procreation, but rather with the fact that humans necessarily experience emotions such as anger, resentment, jealousy, guilt, and so forth, and these emotions often come up in relation to sexual matters. A stable social structure must manage these emotions, and a social structure of free love does not.
When I made the decision to follow the Biblical teaching to be celibate until marriage and faithful within marriage, I didn’t deprive myself of anything. Quite the opposte. When I lived in an enivronment at college where many people participated in raunchy, promiscuous behavior, I could see that a lot of people were being prodded and bullied into doing things that they didn’t actually enjoy doing. That environment was depriving people of the enjoyment that can come from healthy, monogamous relationships. An environment that promotes monogamy is one that liberates.
So you believe there was once a man that was moon walking on water?
He died. then POOF Came back to life?
Is this what you believe?
There are Christians who post here on the message board. If you’re genuinely interested in having a civil conversation that includes them then you might want to tone down your rhetoric a bit. We get it, you’re not a Christian and you think the whole thing is rather silly. Believe me, we’re all suitably impressed that you’re such a logical free thinker. Now we can move on.
A young man who had recently passed his first wedding anniversary confided in his more experienced friend that there wasn’t much excitement left in his sex life. His friend told him that married couples often settle into a pattern and have to mix it up a little. He pointed at a pair of dogs coupling, and asked ‘When’s the last time you did it that way? That’s what nature intended. Try something a little different’. The next day he asked the young man how thing’s had gone with his wife the night before. The young man replied, ‘She didn’t have any trouble doing it doggy style, but it took a lot of Peppermint Schnapps to get her out on the front lawn’.
Well, a moral code regarding other members of the group. Groups lacking a moral code about killing outsiders, on the other than, seem fairly prevalent, even if the scale of wanton killing is probably less than indicated by the more lurid histories.
And because I can’t resist the opportunity to quote the goddess of alt-country music:
Pick up that rock, drink from that lake
I do my best but I’m made of mistakes
And there’s still a few things that I’m sure of.
I love you this hour, this hour today,
And heaven will smell like the airport.
I may never get there to prove it,
But let’s not waste our time thinkin’ how that ain’t fair
But I’m an animal, you’re an animal, too.
[INDENT][INDENT][INDENT][INDENT][INDENT]-- Neko Case, “I’m An Animal”[/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]
Stranger
I have to tone down my rhetoric but he doesn’t?
Kind of one sided scolding is it not?