public display of affection of love like smooching ,hugging and even maybe just holding hands,is considered immoral in many countries,especially in a country like india,where people tend to give couples strange looks,even worse for homosexual couples.wonder why people claim to be broadminded in their outlook if they can't even bear something as geniuine and simple as this.

There could be a gay threesome on my front lawn. As long as nobody is being hurt, I don't care.

It's not considered immoral so much as inappropriate is it?

Isn't that the same?

Where do you live? Redneck country?

lol...nope not redneck i live in India and unlike the west people here are a lot more conserve you would'nt know what am talking about unless you come live here for a week.

Umm.. India is a pretty big place. Have you been to Goa? I hear it's pretty darn liberal over there.

I think that it also has to do with women still being seen as property in India, and therefore not worthy of affection. A man who shows affection for his wife and children publically is seen as weak or soft. Also sexuality is kept under wraps so that it cuts down on adultery and promiscuous behavior especially under the eyes of children. Women are devalued in India, and treated as third class citizens. 23% of female babies concieved in India end up as abortions or infantcide, and the burning of brides whom their hubands believe are not virgins is still a regular practice even though it is illegal.

I don't mind public displays of affection when they are in good taste, i.e. holding hands, light kissing, and long embraces. I do mind when they have their tongues down each others throat and are fondling each other openly. It's just bad taste, and I don't need my kids stimulated at an earlier age than already is disgracing the U.S. The average age that a male loses his virginity is thirteen and for a girl it's fourteen. What does that say about our moral compass?

It says something about sex education and information.

Yes and no. Because teenage pregnancy is still at pretty high numbers. What it says, is that we no longer care about human respect. We care more about what we can get out of another person than what we can give them. It says that babies, and sex are just another part of the great engine of capitalistic greed in this country. They are material, and as insignificant as getting a tooth pulled or taking the bus home from school. Sex has become routine, unfeeling, irresponsible, and manipulative.

The part they don't teach in sex ed., is how to respect yourself. How to love yourself, and how to find people that will do the same. What is missing from our entire education system in the United States is the tools to cope, to make good decisions and to have compassion and love. The U.S. makes it far too easy to not have to cope, to blame everyone else for your problems, and to become someone elses problem.

I'm afraid that this cannot be changed by sex education alone since the whole indoctrination of the average young american seems to be aimed at producing the result you just described.

spurious: Morally wrong implies it shouldn't be done at all, by inappropriate, it's fine as long as you do it somewhere relatively private.

i think the big mistake youre making here is thinking that people in those cultures are broadminded. they arent. their cultures are religiocentric and they reflect mainly values set out by their religious beliefs. especially in india, where there is a rigid caste system that dictates social class by birth. india also is not a big supporter of rights for women. wives are routinely beaten raped, stoned to death, maimed, and disfigured by their husbands for some imagined act that they have committed to dishonor them. these people are not broadminded or socially enlightened. true, in certain urban centers and other liberal pockets, some of the practices you mentioned go on without comment or reprisal, but for the most part, these acts are frowned upon and punished because the countries where they are taking place have based their laws on some outdated set of religious moralisms. they are by no means broadminded culturally.

i think that this attitude just reflects the sex-negative attitude of western cultures. sex wouldnt be nearly as big a deal here if it wasn't a religous taboo. judeo-christian ethos has turned our sexuality into guilt, and because of this, we see something like a public display of affection and say oh my god thats gross, two people expressing themselves sexually in public. who gives a shit, honestly, what is wrong with it? it has nothing to do with morality. consentual sex is neither morally wrong or morally right, it is a biological imperative, and if we lived back in the stone age, what we think of as little kids today would be having sex in what we would now consider our front lawn probably as soon as they hit puberty. it somehow wasn't viewed as disgusting until we got religion and decided that it was wrong to give in to your natural impulses.