This pretty well sums up my attitude towards so called natural law. It like God's law, it always seems reflective of the biases of the person appealing to it.
Tom
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Homosexuality is "Contrary to Natural Law"?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Tom
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
People seem to use "natural law" as a list of things which they personally don't find icky. Anything which makes them feel icky or uncomfortable doesn't pass muster as a "natural law." Basically, it's the reasoning and rationalization of an insecure child.
The Adept
Member
Homosexuality does not exist in nature.
Other than mankind, here are some others....
List of animals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Yes, but it is not natural for all these animals to engage in homosexual behaviors. They've obviously all succumbed to the propaganda of the gay agenda.
Quiddity
UndertheInfluenceofGiants
Not to mention that they throw poo at each other. We could compare that as well.
The Adept
Member
Humans do not live in a natural society but rather unnatural ones for the species.
This is an important feature of bisexuality in captive animals.
There is no exclusive homosexuality in nature.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I wasn't aware that throwing poo at each other was part of the gay agenda. I'm a little behind on my political and social movements.
The Adept
Member
No they are not intellectually capable of doing so, and so they do not.
see my above post.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
You don't pay much attention to other animals do you?
If it's made for nothing more, then why does anal stimulation feel good and how do some people achieve orgasms through anal penetration and how can it intensify an orgasm if it has no other use?
The Adept
Member
You do not pay much attention to human speech and it's meanings.
They do not display exclusive homosexual behavior.
The humans have word for this; bisexual.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
So bisexuality is natural, and thus acceptable then.
The Adept
Member
We are not talking about bisexuality.
NewGuyOnTheBlock
Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
First, there is a statement of ignorance. Homosexuality exists in nature. In fact, there are instances that have been observed where certain animals show a preference for the same gender, in and out of captivity.
Can Animals Really Be Gay? | Popular Science
Second. I tire of the "bait and switch" tactic being used in "homosexuality in nature" discussions. A: Homosexuality is not natural. B: Well, that's not true, because it exists in nature, so here is the proof. A: Well then, maybe we should start throwing poo at each other and legalize rape, because these exist in nature too!
So, to clarify this:
Knock it off. The statement that something is "natural' is not the statement that something is "moral". These are two different arguments and what we end up with are circular reasoning and a never-ending debate.
Rape, infanticide, genocide, bestiality, pedophilia -- All of these exist in nature. The existence of this says one thing and one thing only: These behaviors have a natural basis. It is NOT saying that such things should be considered moral or okay.
So. The argument that homosexuality is unnatural is a false argument, provably wrong and proven wrong consistently through observation and our own genetics. Homosexuality has a basis in natural processes. This is undeniable and irrefutable. Homosexuality is natural.
But, just because it is "natural" does not mean that it is "moral". Any person who debates the case against "homosexuality is unnatural" is not debating the case that "homosexuality is moral". A given thing being immoral or moral is a different issue which can not be judged by the standard of what happens in nature. Other criteria must be used to judge the morality of our actions other than acting like chimpanzees.
I do not hold homosexual behavior to be, in and of itself, immoral; but that basis does not come from the false premise of emulating octopus.
Last edited:
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
We are now that you brought it up.
It is your contention that bisexuality is natural, and thus acceptable?
The Adept
Member
Your article does not describe homosexuality;
'..the same-sex mating habits of Octopoteuthis deletron, a deep-sea squid that indiscriminately shoots sperm packets onto both male and female squids'
Obviously it is impaired. That aside, it is not an instance.
Yours is the statement of ignorance.
The Adept
Member
It is an obvious impairment and error scientifically speaking.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
What scientific field do you work in? It seems like it must be either in animal behavior or social science, but I'm not sure.
Uberpod
Active Member
Exactly, just like the mouth is for eating and therefore can't be used for kissing . . . . or talking!!!
