Is it ironic when religious people get upset over homosexuality because they think its unnatural? (moral, abomination)

[Fluffy]

No. When religious people say "Homosexuality is unnatural" they mean "against God". When they say "God is unnatural" they mean "above nature". It is just a semantic confusion. There is no inconsistency.

Originally Posted by dreamer

Erm - homosexuality is un-natural scientifically

The science is that - everything is here to pass on its genes it specifies that the meaning of life is to procreate and to keep life going.

Homosexuality is against procreation and there for is un natural as this is against nature.

Science does not indicate this because whether or not something is "natural" is not a judgement that is scientifically relevant. Similarly, science does not make moral or legal judgements. However, science does indicate that:
1) There are many alternative sexualities other than heterosexuality which are found in nature but exist in order to help pass on genes. For example, most bees are sterile but this aids the queen to pass on her genes. There might be a similar explanation for human homosexuality.
2) Humans do many things that do not help pass on their genes. For example, many humans believe that sex should be reserved for marriage and yet this is clearly not a model replicated anywhere else in nature where the most successful tactic seems to be to have as much sex as soon as possible. Regardless, we don't declare all such instances "unnatural".

Originally Posted by dreamer

However God is said to have created nature therefore incontrol of nature therefore he is not un natural.

If you are speaking of the God of the Bible then he is declared "unnatural" many times in order to indicate this very fact.

[Yoda]

Hey Robin glad you came over..........as far as the OP is concerned, being homosexual is not a natural act ,that said as long as their views so to speak are not aimed at me I have no problem with it...to each his own they always say..........judge not, lest you be judged...

[Somkid]

Who says homosexuality is unnatural I see it occurring everywhere in nature, saying it is "unnatural" is a religious cop out and down right propaganda without evidence or proof, not to mention you have never owned two male dogs.

[Heneni]

Yes indeed there are animals that display homosexual behaviour. Though we shouldnt exactly call it that since they are not part of the human race.HOMO being the wrong word for their behaviour.

There are SOME animals that display this behaviour.I find it unsuitable for the human race, to use animals as a model to base their behaviour on. Just because this behaviour is found in animals, should we then assume it is ok for humans?

I guess if it pleases someone to display homosexual animal like behaviour , since they find it natural based on the fact that there are animals doing it, then there should also be no quib regarding copying the somewhat unethical behaviour of some mothers eating their young, or abondoning them. Would that be an appropriate action to take as a human? If we want to take animals as our standard to live buy, and animals have no concept of morals and ethics, then we are saying it is Ok to be unethical and without morals.

If we want to say that homosexual intercourse is Ok since there are animals that display such behaviour,then we should not care about abandoing children or eating them too.

And I am sure that most people would not agree that such behaviour is Ok, and therefore using the somewhat rare occurance of homosexaul intercourse in the animal kingdom by those that practise the same, is a cop out. And religion has nothing to do with it.

As I explained before in my post regarding chromosones, it is possible for any person to find a suitable mate, without that mate being of the same sex.

Love
Heneni

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by Heneni

Yes indeed there are animals that display homosexual behaviour. Though we shouldnt exactly call it that since they are not part of the human race.HOMO being the wrong word for their behaviour.

There are SOME animals that display this behaviour.I find it unsuitable for the human race, to use animals as a model to base their behaviour on. Just because this behaviour is found in animals, should we then assume it is ok for humans?

I guess if it pleases someone to display homosexual animal like behaviour , since they find it natural based on the fact that there are animals doing it, then there should also be no quib regarding copying the somewhat unethical behaviour of some mothers eating their young, or abondoning them. Would that be an appropriate action to take as a human? If we want to take animals as our standard to live buy, and animals have no concept of morals and ethics, then we are saying it is Ok to be unethical and without morals.

If we want to say that homosexual intercourse is Ok since there are animals that display such behaviour,then we should not care about abandoing children or eating them too.

And I am sure that most people would not agree that such behaviour is Ok, and therefore using the somewhat rare occurance of homosexaul intercourse in the animal kingdom by those that practise the same, is a cop out. And religion has nothing to do with it.

As I explained before in my post regarding chromosones, it is possible for any person to find a suitable mate, without that mate being of the same sex.

Love
Heneni

Nice strawman.
The fact that homosexual behaviour is abundant in nature makes the claim that it is unnatural rather asinine.

There is a major difference between engaging in homosexual behaviour and abandoning/eating our young.
One does not harm others whilst the other does harm another.

[Heneni]

If someone wants to use the animal kingdom to justify homosexual behaviour why be picky and choosy? Why not ascribe to all their behaviour then?

This is not about religious folks getting their knickers in a twist about homosexual behaviour, this is about practising homosexuals using the animal kingdom as a cop out for their choices.

Id rather prefer them to use another reason to justify it.

Love
heneni

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by Heneni

If someone wants to use the animal kingdom to justify homosexual behaviour why be picky and choosy? Why not ascribe to all their behaviour then?

Because not causing harm to another is one of the basis for our laws.

Originally Posted by Heneni

This is not about religious folks getting their knickers in a twist about homosexual behaviour, this is about practising homosexuals using the animal kingdom as a cop out for their choices.

In a way I agree.
This is about theists trying to justify their deity's dislike of homosexual behaviour.
Thus they precariously cling to the asinine claim that it is unnatural.

And you have it backwards.
It was not until after theists started claiming homosexual behaviour as unnatural that the homosexuals started pointing out that it happens all through nature.

Originally Posted by Heneni

Id rather prefer them to use another reason to justify it.

There is no need to "justify" homosexual behaviour.
It is a natural thing that causes no harm to others.

[Heneni]

Hello

I have one particular friend that is gay. A brilliantly intelligent and accutely well read person.

First of all. It is my intention to understand...so bear with me here.

I understand that you feel no need to have to justify yourself, but for the sake of me understanding could you please?

You also say that there is no need to justify homosexaul behaviour, and then continue to say that it is natural and causes no harm to others.

Is that then your justification? It is natural and it causes no harm?

If so, why do you see it as natural, and secondly in what way do you regard it as not harming others?

Love
Heneni