Homosexuality-->Unnatural-->Wrong (moral, moral, God, religion)

[Fluffy]

Wow you know this is only the fourth thread in this section and 2 of them are started by me . I hope that says something good about me and not something bad lol .

Anyway, I find that one on one debates are very useful for thrashing out the details of a focused issue, especially if I am in two minds about it. In this thread I wish to close in on two linked issues to do with the argument that looks like this:
homosexuality-->unnatural-->wrong

I would like to debate steps 1 and 2 in this argument:

1) Homosexuality is unnatural
2) What is unnatural is wrong
3) Therefore homosexuality is wrong

since the third step is fairly elementary given the first 2.

I would like to keep this debate religion free. Your god might condemn homosexuality but mine sees nothing wrong with it so in order to prevent this ace deadlock from being played, I feel it is better to avoid the issue.

I am taking the position that homosexuality is natural and is amoral ie it is neither right or wrong. As per the subforum rules I would be happy to debate with one or more people who wish to defend the opposing views.

A warning to anyone who wishes to take part: I want this thread to be creative and get somewhere. I will probably heavily analyse any argument given to me and criticism will form a large part of my posts but this is just the way I debate and I mean no harm with my words. Come with a strong argument and you will leave having convinced me that I am in the wrong.

Thank you
Fluffy

[Darkdale]

Nothing can be unnatural. Everything is natural.

[Fluffy]

Nothing can be unnatural. Everything is natural.

I agree to an extent. I believe that only those things which I can't percieve with my five senses are those things that are unnatural and since I cannot know about those things which aren't percievable, they might as well not exist from my sheltered outlook,

[nutshell]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

I agree to an extent. I believe that only those things which I can't percieve with my five senses are those things that are unnatural and since I cannot know about those things which aren't percievable, they might as well not exist from my sheltered outlook,

That seems to be an extremely limiting opinion of existence. Surely, things exist which you cannot perceive with your five senses. For example, with which of the five senses do you perceive the smallest bits of a molecule we have yet to uncover or the farthest reaches of space we wait to explore. You haven't perceived either of these things with your five senses and yet, I trust you admit their existence.

[Fluffy]

That seems to be an extremely limiting opinion of existence. Surely, things exist which you cannot perceive with your five senses. For example, with which of the five senses do you perceive the smallest bits of a molecule we have yet to uncover or the farthest reaches of space we wait to explore. You haven't perceived either of these things with your five senses and yet, I trust you admit their existence.

It is extremely limiting yes. I view it as onestep up from global scepticism which was a position I found myself in until very recently. However, until I can know something, anything, about the farthest region of space or the smallest undiscovered particle, then surely they will have an equal impact upon my belief system than as if neither existed? Therefore, until such a point in time occurs, it does not matter whether I treat them as existed or not.

[Fluffy]

Bump. Are there no takers at all?

[DonB]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

Wow you know this is only the fourth thread in this section and 2 of them are started by me . I hope that says something good about me and not something bad lol .

I fully agree (sorry, no argument here). BTW, I am not homosexual, but have many friends who are. I find that there is really no justification for passing moral judgement on an issue which, as you said, is natural. I did not choose to be right-handed, but I am.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

I would like to debate steps 1 and 2 in this argument:

1) Homosexuality is unnatural
2) What is unnatural is wrong
3) Therefore homosexuality is wrong

since the third step is fairly elementary given the first 2.

I would like to keep this debate religion free.
Fluffy

It is impossible to keep the arguement religous free. There is no secular argument against homosexulaity. Only religious ones. You can dance around the subject pro and con but at the heart of the matter is a god full of vengence and spite.

[michel]

Originally Posted by DonB

I fully agree (sorry, no argument here). BTW, I am not homosexual, but have many friends who are. I find that there is really no justification for passing moral judgement on an issue which, as you said, is natural. I did not choose to be right-handed, but I am.

Hi DonB,

As I notice this is your first post on the forum, I thought I would take the opportunity to welcome you here.

Perhaps you would like to post on:- Are you new to ReligiousForums.com? , in order to introduce yourself to the members here.

Nice post, by the way; of course, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I would warn you, though that this is a 'hot topic' on this forum. Tempers have been known to get frayed............