Of Penguins and People

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Sep 21 2005, 12:40 PM']You are attacking a premise, though I believe you weaken it you do not entirely remove it.

Apes, gorillas in particular, have been recorded as acting on homosexual instincts at times (while in the wild).  Though I believe you are correct that it is not a widespread phenomena, it does exist, and thus the premise (though weakened) remains.

I agree that basing human acceptable behavior on animal behavior is foolhardy and a desperate ploy to justify perversed behaviors, however, several gay activist firmly believe they have a seed of supportable logic based on relativism (when you remove the absolute - God, from the equation, relatively everything sooner or later becomes acceptable).  This is also the same kind of relative logic which is slowly beginning to support pedophilia.

Brave new world we live in my friend!  Brave now world!
(I'm actually in the process of purchasing a first edition of that book by Steinbeck)

(notice the smiley is not upside down: your screen is.  this smiley is perfectly normal)
Sirklawd: Yes i believe you've got the main idea within your post (the reply to double effect is indeed summed in the fact the evil does exist and this is consistent with Catholic beliefs, though the explanation of evil's non-existance can be a laborious one.
[right][snapback]732719[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Agreed - just a few small corrections.

I believe you're thinking of the bonobo chimp, not the gorilla (though primatologists seem to be always making new discoveries on ape behavior). The sexually hyperactive bonobo, which engages in various same-sex genital behavior, and lives in female-dominated groups, is often held up as a kind of model by the cultural Left.
However, in bonobos, as with most supposedly homosexual animals, the same-sex activity is done to assert or accept dominance and other social roles, and never involves penetration or ejaculation. It is never a substitute for sex with females. (i.e. - there are no "gay" apes.)
And the fact that even though bonobos differ only extremely slightly genetically from the common chimp, the two species are behaviorably very different, shows that one cannot use apes as a basis for human nature or behavior based on genetic similarity.

And [i]Brave New World [/i]is by Aldous Huxley, not Steinbeck.

Very prescient futuristic satire, written in 1932 - I'd recommend it.
In the "brave new world" of the future:

Babies are no longer made the old-fashioned way, but are genetically engineered for various jobs and mass-produced in factories.
Motherhood is regarded as an unspeakable obscenity.

Marriage and monogamy are extinct. Sterile sex is nothing but casual hedonistic fun, as sex and procreation have been entirely seperated.

Children are taught "erotic play" in pre-school.

Henry Ford (perfector of assembly-line efficiency) has replaced Jesus Christ as the god of choice. He is reverently referred to as "Our Ford," and religious services in honor of "Our Ford" are sexual orgies.

Edited September 22, 2005 by Socrates

[Sirklawd]

brave new world is EXCELLENT. if only for the fact that if Auldus Huxley was around today he would litteraly carp himself, and scream out "IT WAS SATIRE NOT AN INSTRUCTION BOOKLET"

then Jonathan Swift would be like "brother...its useless, grab a fork and eat up!"

[Winchester]

Animals also kill their young out of anger.

Following your premise, killing your young out of anger can't be immoral.

No one said this world is perfect. It is tainted by sin. You've skipped too much theology to have proven your point, in addition to the equivocation that makes your argument tacit approval of murder as well as "homosexuality," which is not really defined in your argument.

[dspen2005]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Sep 20 2005, 10:02 PM']Actually, if one looks at the evidence 'homosexuality' is prevalent among animals only in captivity (as with the penguin case).  It is extremely rare in the wild.  Captivity is not natural.  So homosexuality among animals is very similar to 'prison rape' senario mentioned above.
[right][snapback]732044[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

this is true. captivity places environmental pressures that are intensified via lack of outside contact and exposure to elements (aka other animals of the same species and opposite sex). If we look at humans as an example... in prison populations, especially.... there is a prevalence amongst prison populations of homosexual activity in an otherwise predominantly heterosexual environment. why? because of the pressures placed upon the group -- if we place penguins or any other animal under the same conditions/ or similar, we would increase the probability of an anomaly to occur in the respect of relationship formation and bonding.