That may be true, but they maintain that homosexual sex is a violation of natural law thus an immoral distortion of the interned use of sex.
-
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!
Is being gay a sin according to your religion?
- Thread starter AlphaAlex115
- Start date
That may be true, but they maintain that homosexual sex is a violation of natural law thus an immoral distortion of the interned use of sex.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
LOL! You folks are so funny with your warped dogma.
What you are saying up there - would then also have to mean - that heterosexuals that can't have kids, and continue to have sex - are just being lustful.
And that of course is just stupid - they are "both" in love - children or not.
*
dgirl1986
Big Queer Chesticles!
In their own mind yes. In reality...not so much.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
LOL! Since the majority of the animal kingdom has gay sex - we have to assume it is part of "natural law!"
*
dgirl1986
Big Queer Chesticles!
This is what sprang to mind!
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Last edited:
Perhaps. My point here is not to defend this style of thinking, only to establish its coherency given the moral framework in which Western Christian moral thinking historically worked.
You don't understand what Christians mean by natural law. It's got nothing to do with "nature" in the modern sense of the word.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Laws came about from groups having to group together for survival, and a need not to kill each other.
Religion is just junk added on top.
You said you were done before.
*
Last edited:
Whiterain
Get me off of this planet
Your archaic religious crap has no place in modern scientific society.
*[/quote]
It's not my religious dogma; I'm simply trying to support the principles of a dogma in
which you are arguing.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Only SOME religions hold that stance (and people they have influenced through abuse, over thousands of years.)
Homosexuality is found throughout nature, - and thus is natural, - and not immoral.
*
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Ingledsva said:
Fine - Their archaic religious crap has no place in modern scientific society. :yes:
PS. Learn to use the quote - as you are making it look like I am saying things which someone else said!
*
Last edited:
You could at least be honest.
Natural law is a system of reasoning based of the eithical framework of Scholastic Aristotelianism. It attempts to derive objective moral precepts based on observations of natural function, with function being the natural teleology or end of an object.
The fact that homosexuality exists in nature is irrelevant because that's an equivocation of the term nature in the sense that they mean "nature" in natural law.
Natural law is essentially the belief that everything in nature has a definite end to which it moves or exists. In the case of sex, it's procreation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Don't even try that BULL here.
nat·u·ral law
noun
noun: natural law; plural noun: natural laws
1. a body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct.
2. an observable law relating to natural phenomena. - Google
*
Natural law, or the law of nature (Latin: lex naturalis; ius naturale), is a system of law that is determined by nature, and so is universal. - Wiki
*
'A body of law or a specific principle held to be derived from nature and binding upon human society in the absence of or in addition to positive law"
"In jurisprudence and political philosophy, a system of right or justice common to all humankind and derived from nature rather than from the rules of society, or positive law. The concept can be traced to Aristotle, who held that what was just by nature was not always the same as what was just by law. In one form or another, the existence of natural law was asserted by the Stoics..." - Merriam Webster
*
Triumphant_Loser
Libertarian Egalitarian
Except that homosexuality has been documented in nearly every single animal species on this planet.
AlphaAlex115
Active Member
And this disapproves of it being a violation of nature how exactly?
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
By the FACT that it exists in most species on the earth.
In other words - there would have to be reasons for it.
*
PeaceSeeker
Member
Sins were invented by people in order to frighten the masses to conform to standards set by people.
Yes, but the existence homosexuality is incidental. Sexuality evolved to be reproductive, hence the final cause of sexuality is reproduction. The fact that sex feels good is a mechanism of sex, but a mechanism isn't the same things as a purpose, which if the purpose of sex in nature is to reproduce, then homosexual sex cannot be natural in its final cause.
The final cause of sexuality in nature as put there by God, is procreation. To frustrate this ordered purpose is sinful because it's a wilful distorting of God's purposes expressed by the movement of things within nature. This is the same reasoning that motivates the prohibition on contraception, because contraception by its explicit purpose frustrates the intended reason (or natural goal) for sexuality.
Natural law is not about what exists in nature, but the movement of things within it towards their intended definite ends. The idea is that one can derive objective moral principles by the observation of such ends. The fact that distortions of the final cause of things in nature exists, is not an insight that centuries of scholastic thought mysteriously overlooked.
Last edited by a moderator: