The Objective Morality Debate

[mortify]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1308784185' post='2257439']
If there is a genetic basis for homosexuality, then how can you say that it's against human nature or natural law?[/quote]

Just because disorders occur naturally, doesn't mean they are part of human nature. So for example blindness can be inherited, but then why is it considered a disorder? It's a disorder precisely because it is human nature to be able to see. Human nature is an abstract concept entailing what a human being is and what he ought to be able to do. So even if a "gay gene" were discovered, it wouldn't render homosexual acts "ordered." It would simply render homosexuality genetically inheritied disorder (and we already have many of those.) However it should be noted that the human genome has been entirely mapped out, and no "gay gene" has been identified.

In general, I wouldn't hang an argument around an "if" statement.

[quote]Homosexuality also occurs among other animals (not that it means that people should act like other animals) so how can it not be natural as well?[/quote]

Animals and Human beings share many common disorders.

[quote]Why would a god who created genes that manifest in homosexuality be against it? [/quote]

That's a good question, and the following may seem like a cop-out, but it's the truth. God is not the cause of these disorders, they stem from original sin. The nature God originally gave us was perfectly ordered, and supernaturally endowed.

[quote]I think you're simplifying things a bit too much, and that a more in depth understanding of genetics and physiology is needed.
[/quote]

Share your views, I'm open for discussion.

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308785772' post='2257444']
Just because disorders occur naturally, doesn't mean they are part of human nature. So for example blindness can be inherited, but then why is it considered a disorder? It's a disorder precisely because it is human nature to be able to see. Human nature is an abstract concept entailing what a human being is and what he ought to be able to do. So even if a "gay gene" were discovered, it wouldn't render homosexual acts "ordered." It would simply render homosexuality genetically inheritied disorder (and we already have many of those.) However it should be noted that the human genome has been entirely mapped out, and no "gay gene" has been identified.

In general, I wouldn't hang an argument around an "if" statement.

Animals and Human beings share many common disorders.


Share your views, I'm open for discussion.[/quote]

From what I've seen about discussions on this topic, it can be divided into two parts:

1) that homosexuality is 'unnatural' in the sense that some sort of disease that needs fixing and
2) that if homosexuals were allowed to marry, for instance, then they would threaten the fabric of society, in which the smallest unit is the family.

About 1:

This is complicated, and I'm reluctant to be too quick to call something 'wrong', 'disordered' or 'not normal' based on natural arguments. I've seen people give simplistic evolutionary explanations for why it's "wrong", such as homosexuals naturally wouldn't pass on their genes anyways so it's against evolutionary natural law (in a pre in vitro age) but those are weak because there are many other cases where people will not pass on their genes. Not to mention the sole purpose of human existence is not to pass on genes. I've also added two links below which shed a little light on the subject. Not much is known yet, but it's no reason to make hasty assumptions. We know that evolution happened and that there are people on the spectrum going from heterosexual to homosexual so those must also have evolutionary explanations.

People also say that a male homosexual act is also "wrong" in the sense that people are using things that are contrary to their evolution or that were not designed for such and such. You would have to be a believer and have the preconception that such things offend your god to see what two consenting people are choosing to do with their bodies without hurting anybody else as wrong. My focus is entirely different from that of a religious perspective, but I'm not going to try and convince you of my view, because you already hold those preconceptions which I would have to argue against first.

For one, if there really is an objective morality and especially how it is known and how it can be proved to be known. After that is established then if homosexuality is really objectively wrong. This is important because if people are looking for a justification for meddling in other's private lives, including those who do not share their beliefs and would not otherwise choose to, then you have to have your arguments standing on solid ground.

How would you determine if other body parts are being used for things other than their evolutionarily intended purposes?

The religious have already made the hasty assumption that homosexuality can be cured and that it's a fixable disease, but it's more likely not the case. A gay gene has not been found, but it could be an interaction of more than one gene.

See [url="http://www.physorg.com/news84720662.html"]here [/url]and [url="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/200906/could-homosexual-genes-be-naturally-selected"]here.[/url]

The two links also talk about reproductive success that might have favoured genes which manifest in homosexuality.


Not to mention, although I see some religious people arguing against homosexuality based on good intentions, I think that it's misguided and just wrong.

About part 2:

I think this is the real crux of the matter, just as evolutionary theory is for creationists who see it as a route to moral degradation.

Whether or not a homosexual couple should raise children is another matter in which a child's development would have to be analysed like is the case with separated couples, and I don't know enough on that to add anything useful. The whole mother father role model thing for instance.


[quote]That's a good question, and the following may seem like a cop-out, but it's the truth. God is not the cause of these disorders, they stem from original sin. The nature God originally gave us was perfectly ordered, and supernaturally endowed.[/quote]

How can you reconcile that view with evolution and our biological origins?

[stevil]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308785772' post='2257444']
Just because disorders occur naturally, doesn't mean they are part of human nature.
[/quote]
How do we define disorder?
How does love fit into this definition? How does sex fit into this definition?
What is the harm of people being homosexual? Why would people want to put effort into stopping people from living their lives in a way that harms noone?

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308785772' post='2257444']
It should be noted that the human genome has been entirely mapped out, and no "gay gene" has been identified.
[/quote]
This is entirely remarkable, I didn't know that humans have completely mapped out the human genome with complete clarity and understanding. I suspect this isn't the case, if you know otherwise, then please provide a reference for this claim.

Even if being gay is genetic or not, does it really matter? If two uninhibited people happen to fall in love and decide to experiment with their sexuality, does it really matter that they have chosen this path? What's wrong with the act of sex again? It leads to abortion? Not in this case, so what's wrong here? Where is the harm, and what business is it of yours or mine?

Should we put together a law to decide who is allowed to love who, do we take into consideration ,age, race, religion, skin colour, hair colour, eye colour, weight, size, IQ, EQ. Who would be the authority? You? Me? A jury of peers? The Catholic Church? Should people be required to fill in a questionaire which is presented to the Catholic church and then after much consideration the church can deem whether these people can fall in love and be united?


[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308785772' post='2257444']
God is not the cause of these disorders, they stem from original sin. The nature God originally gave us was perfectly ordered, and supernaturally endowed.
[/quote]
Original sin was the act of Adam eating the "forbidden" fruit. Was this fruit so powerful that it created genetic defects in humans, many, many, many generations down the line?
I would love it if someone would do a DNA test on the eurochrist miracles. If it is truly Jesus' body parts then we would expect it to have no genetic defects what-so-ever. In this way it would be remarkable.

[mortify]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1308827220' post='2257657']
How do we define disorder?
How does love fit into this definition? How does sex fit into this definition?
What is the harm of people being homosexual? Why would people want to put effort into stopping people from living their lives in a way that harms noone?[/quote]

Anything contrary to human nature is a disorder. And disorders always bear some physical, psychological, and spiritual harm. The person may not even be aware of it at the time, but they are damaging themselves and their relationship to God. Peace is the tranquility of order, and no higher joy comes from following the Will of God. Once a person knows the Will of God they are liberated from so many artificial needs, so many false anxieties, so much unhappiness that plagues our society. God is the creator of human nature, and so going against human nature is going against His will. It is no surprise that those who engage in homosexulaity and other sexual deviancies have higher rates of depression.

Efforts to steer a person away from homosexual acts are virtuallly futile. Our society has largely condoned such actions, and the great impetus is in support of such people. I can only say that such people deny themselves a great deal of happiness and peace that would come if they only followed the Will of their Creator. But we all make our own choices. Fortunately, many have made the right one:

[u][b]http://couragerc.net/[/b][/u]

[quote]This is entirely remarkable, I didn't know that humans have completely mapped out the human genome with complete clarity and understanding. I suspect this isn't the case, if you know otherwise, then please provide a reference for this claim.[/quote]

The entire genome has been mapped out, and as you can imagine there is a great interest in discovering a "gay gene." No such gene has been identified.

[quote]Even if being gay is genetic or not, does it really matter?[/quote]

Whether homosexuality is genetic or not does not affect its morality, so it doesn't matter in that sense.

[quote]If two uninhibited people happen to fall in love and decide to experiment with their sexuality, does it really matter that they have chosen this path? What's wrong with the act of sex again? It leads to abortion? Not in this case, so what's wrong here? Where is the harm, and what business is it of yours or mine?[/quote]

It's not fraternal charity to let one's brother continue in a wrong. If I am wrong, or engage in wrong doing, I would certainly hope someone would point out my error or help me get back on the right track! At the same time however, we recognize that people are free agents, and that they may ultimately choose their own perdition. It's a sad reality, but many do this.

You always have to remember, that if we soley go by the "uninhibited" choices of individuals, we open the gates to everything. We know for example, that pedarastry was acceptable in ancient Greek culture (they depicted such acts on their pottery!) However in our society, for an older man to have a sexual relationships with a teen is deplorable. I think in the decades to come, even such a relationship will eventually be condoned by our society. No rational argument can be made against it (from our society's perspective that is.) So road to the uninhibited is virtually limitless.

[quote]Should we put together a law to decide who is allowed to love who, do we take into consideration ,age, race, religion, skin colour, hair colour, eye colour, weight, size, IQ, EQ. Who would be the authority? You? Me? A jury of peers? The Catholic Church? Should people be required to fill in a questionaire which is presented to the Catholic church and then after much consideration the church can deem whether these people can fall in love and be united?[/quote]

Of course not. "Love" is used many ways in our time, and often times its in a wrong way! But generally speaking, look at love from the stand point of attraction, or what was classically called an "appetite," it is not controllable. That is, we have attractions to things for various reasons. The problem is that our attractions may be towards things that are harmful, or disordered. Our attractions are blind to the rightness or wrongness of thing, they simply follow to what is pleasurable and appears good. This is where the higher faculties of will and intellect come in. Although we can't controll our attractions, we can't give in to those that lead us to the wrong. A married man may be tempted to cheat on his wife, but he must not follow through with his desires. An envious man may be tempted to steal something from his neighbor, but he must not act on it either. Sometimes the feelings can be habitual. You may have a grown man that has an inordinate attraction to pre pubescent children. Needless to say, he can't follow through with it. The point is, having an attraction, even a love attraction, does not mean what one is attracted to is right and good.

[quote]Original sin was the act of Adam eating the "forbidden" fruit. Was this fruit so powerful that it created genetic defects in humans, many, many, many generations down the line?
I would love it if someone would do a DNA test on the eurochrist miracles. If it is truly Jesus' body parts then we would expect it to have no genetic defects what-so-ever. In this way it would be remarkable.
[/quote]

Original sin is the fallen state we inherit due to Adam's personal sin. Adam was created in perfect state, a state called original justice. His body was in complete conformity to his reason and will, and they were in complete conformity with God. Such that Adam experienced no pain, no anxiety, no disturbance of the soul. He was in utter happiness and peace. When his will rebelled against God, his body rebelled against his spirit, and so we note in our selves that we are drawn unwillingly to the wrong, and following the right is very difficulty.

[stevil]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308872493' post='2257874']
Anything contrary to human nature is a disorder. And disorders always bear some physical, psychological, and spiritual harm.
[/quote]
Our bodies don't come with an instruction manual, how are we to know occording to human nature what is the natural use for our body parts?
I could say it is far more unnatural for us to fly than it is unnatural for us to have sex with whomever we might be in love with.
Shaking hands seems unnatural to me, why press my hand up next to another persons hand? Why wrap my fingers around it and start moving up and down in unison? Is it really natural to do this and also gaze into the other person's eyes at the same time? Am I supposed to smile as if I am enjoying touching this person's hand? Is same sex handshaking within human nature?


[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308872493' post='2257874']
The person may not even be aware of it at the time, but they are damaging themselves and their relationship to God. Peace is the tranquility of order, and no higher joy comes from following the Will of God.
[/quote]
For one to want to adhere to this, one must believe in a god and one must be aware of the will of this god with enough clarity as to know what this god thinks is right or wrong.
For the non believer, we are already damned according to Christianity, Having broken the first half of the 12 commandments, being all about belief in god, and also with references in the bible for the requirement to believe. It seems to me you would be worrying about whether the dishes have been done rather than reallising the tsunami has destroyed the entire house.

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308872493' post='2257874']
It is no surprise that those who engage in homosexulaity and other sexual deviancies have higher rates of depression.
[/quote]
Homosexuals are often scorned by Christian based societies, even their parents are taught to be shameful of their children.Many Homosexuals try to hide their inner truths or try to deny their inner truths, I can understand how this may lead to depression.


[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308872493' post='2257874']
Efforts to steer a person away from homosexual acts are virtuallly futile.
[/quote]
I feel efforts should be made to support and embrace people's stance especially when it is one of a loving nature.
Finding a suitable live partner is a difficult task and when you find a special someone, it is special indeed. People who try and put scorn or try to break up this special loving bond are ultimately against love.

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308872493' post='2257874']
It's not fraternal charity to let one's brother continue in a wrong. If I am wrong, or engage in wrong doing, I would certainly hope someone would point out my error or help me get back on the right track!
[/quote]
The problem is that everyone has a different sense of what is right and wrong, we are wrong to push our own morals onto others.

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1308872493' post='2257874']
The point is, having an attraction, even a love attraction, does not mean what one is attracted to is right and good.
[/quote]
Let that person who is in love to decide on whether it is right and good. If both people are consenting and are of mature age and sound mind then they ought to choose their own destiny, As humans we ought to respect their choices, If god exists then the god can judge if that is its want.

[mortify]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1308946590' post='2258206']
Our bodies don't come with an instruction manual, how are we to know occording to human nature what is the natural use for our body parts?
I could say it is far more unnatural for us to fly than it is unnatural for us to have sex with whomever we might be in love with.
Shaking hands seems unnatural to me, why press my hand up next to another persons hand? Why wrap my fingers around it and start moving up and down in unison? Is it really natural to do this and also gaze into the other person's eyes at the same time? Am I supposed to smile as if I am enjoying touching this person's hand? Is same sex handshaking within human nature?[/quote]

Our bodies do come with an instruction manual, it's called the Divine Law. The Laws God enjoins on us are not arbitrary rules, they coincide with our nature. God knows our nature better than we do, and so when He says, "don't do this!," it's like an instruction manually saying not to drop the toaster in bath water (ok, cheesy example, but you get the point!) Following God's "manual" leads to a proper use of our body, psyche, and spirit, and therefore to greater happiness and peace. Breaking the rules only leads to destruction. Homosexual acts are one of things that God has clearly condemned, but it also falls under what we call natural law. It's natural because you don't need Divine revelation to know that it's wrong. Simply studying human physiology reveals that this is a disordered behavior. We don't need to go into much detail with the act itself, but its basic knowledge that the parts involved are reproductive organs. Note the adjective, *reproductive.* It's not coincidence that at the moment of climax a man ejects millions if reproductive cells called sperm, and a woman is more turned on during her more fertile periods. Clearly, and without any Divine revelation saying so, the primarcy function of these organs are for procreation. Procreation involves two people, a male and a female, and therefore there is a unitive aspect. Thus sex is primarily for procreation and secondarily for union (specifically between a man and woman.) Any other use that does not end in procreation and union is ultimately disordered. That is why self stimulation, sodomy, homosexuality, beastiality, etc, are all disordered acts.

As for shaking someone's hand, there is nothing contrary to nature about it. Humans are social creature and we instinctively shake hands, give high fives, etc. Now if you decided to cut your fingers off, that would be contrary to human nature, since you're meant to heave fingers! Really, if you think about it, it's not that hard to see.

[quote]For one to want to adhere to this, one must believe in a god and one must be aware of the will of this god with enough clarity as to know what this god thinks is right or wrong.
For the non believer, we are already damned according to Christianity, Having broken the first half of the 12 commandments, being all about belief in god, and also with references in the bible for the requirement to believe. It seems to me you would be worrying about whether the dishes have been done rather than reallising the tsunami has destroyed the entire house.[/quote]

There are non-believers who find things like homosexuality innapropriate (ever meet an Atheist homophobe?) But they will consider their view a personal one, and still consider it acceptable for consenting adults to do whatever they want.

As for atheists, I don't think it follow so quick that they are condemned. Many are subconciously seeking God, in ways they are totally unaware. And more often than not, the "god" atheists reject is a false image of god. I.e. the image of the old venerable man, with a long white beard, sitting on a throne on the clouds governing the world with his wand! Heck, if that's your image of god, I'm an atheist right alongside you! So in reality, an atheist may not even be rejecting God, but some false idol. Ultimately God will judge ever person by what they know. It's not a universal scale that applies to all people. Some reject God because of their experiences. Perhaps some Christians behaved in an un-Christlike manner, and the damage done was so deep that it forever tarnished the image of Christianity in that person's mind. I can personally relate to this, since when I first returned to Christianity, Catholicism was the last thing on my mind. When I thought Catholicism the first things that came up were Inquisition, indulgences, crusades, corrupt popes, backwardness, and sheer stupidity! Why on earth would I want to be a part of that?! Ha! How powerful false images can be! How difficult to overturn them! This is a total aside, but it's no coincidence that public school history books, tv, and media present Catholicism a certain way. It's precisely to attach certain images and feelings to it. That way when you hear the word, negative connotations are attached to it. But anyway, that's a separate thread! So yes, the point is, it's not that simple! God is merciful, God is just, no soul will go to hell that has not merrited it!

[quote]Homosexuals are often scorned by Christian based societies, even their parents are taught to be shameful of their children.Many Homosexuals try to hide their inner truths or try to deny their inner truths, I can understand how this may lead to depression.[/quote]

You know what's funny about this? I feel the reverse has happened, at least in my part of the United States. I feel like I'm the one in the closet about my faith! Meanwhile, my gay coworkers (all very nice peopel btw!) are open about their sexual preference. What strange times we live in!

[quote]I feel efforts should be made to support and embrace people's stance especially when it is one of a loving nature.
Finding a suitable live partner is a difficult task and when you find a special someone, it is special indeed. People who try and put scorn or try to break up this special loving bond are ultimately against love.[/quote]

My question to you is, why isn't this a universal principle? If homosexual relationships are to be supported because of their "loving nature," what of the love nature between a pedarast and catamite? It just doesn't make sense to me. Why would our society accept one and not the other?

Why interfere with the love an older man has for his teenage male lover? Just take a look at this, its basically the same arguments homosexuals use:

[u][b]http://www.nambla.org/[/b][/u]

What strange times, indeed!

[quote]The problem is that everyone has a different sense of what is right and wrong, we are wrong to push our own morals onto others.[/quote]

But each person doesn't have a different sense on right and wrong, and in fact there is much similarity. When I went to University I had friends from many backgrounds. I recall how we were sitting at a table once, and the discussion of homosexuality came up. I expressed the Catholic position, and to my surprise, they all agreed! This included a person from mainland China, a Hindu from Gujarat India, a Buddhist from Vietnam, and an African with a shamanist background. These are independent cultures that have the same view about homosexuality as Judeo-Christian societies. So who is the odd ball here? Certainly not the Catholics! It's our contemporary Western society that is the black sheep of the world and historical timeline!

[quote]Let that person who is in love to decide on whether it is right and good. If both people are consenting and are of mature age and sound mind then they ought to choose their own destiny, As humans we ought to respect their choices, If god exists then the god can judge if that is its want.
[/quote]

Again, it'll probably be a while before our society permits marriage between man and animal (btw, anyone hear of the woman that wants to marry a dolphin?) and it still doesn't condone pedarast relationships. So why should I be forced to condone homosexual acts? Why should I be forced to accept a totally radical view of marriage? Why should I consider anything such a society defines as right or wrong when it is so irrational? I'll stick with the Catholic Church on this one. When America has finally collapsed, and Western Civilization has turned into Eurasia, the Catholic church will still be there, believing as she alywas has.

[xSilverPhinx]

I found this video done by a YouTube user called QualiaSoup in which he addresses some points about morality without god better than I could:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7xt5LtgsxQ&feature=feedf[/media]

It's not an "angry atheist" video.

[stevil]

QualiaSoup really puts some terrific presentations together. Very good at getting the point across.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1309170120' post='2259034']
QualiaSoup really puts some terrific presentations together. Very good at getting the point across.
[/quote]Respectfully agreed.

[xSilverPhinx]

I love his videos, I only wish he were more prolific! His brother TheraminTrees too.