(October 8, 2011 at 5:27 am)aleialoura Wrote:Biology(October 8, 2011 at 5:21 am)fr0d0 Wrote: A misdirected biological process is just that.Misdirected according to who?
(October 8, 2011 at 6:55 am)Ace Otana Wrote: Morality has nothing to say on the nature of nature. It is perfectly natural for there to be gay animals. No negative side effects. No problems.Those gay animals, if all of the species, would wipe out that species. Sounds negative to me.
(October 8, 2011 at 6:55 am)Ace Otana Wrote: In nature, there is no right or wrong, good or bad. Only the natural world. We are part of the natural world and only we define and see good/bad right/wrong.Precisely.
(October 8, 2011 at 6:55 am)Ace Otana Wrote: There is no bad or wrong in homosexuality.Not to nature, no. But to us [humans] who see the dysfunction, that's a problem.
There are no victims.
(October 8, 2011 at 6:55 am)Ace Otana Wrote: There is no wrong in two people (same sex or not) having sex. If both sides consent to it, it is perfectly fine.If it were only the two people affected, then no one else would need to know about it. As we have to know about it because those two people need backing and support from wider society, it is clearly more than an issue for more than the two that consent.
(October 8, 2011 at 7:21 am)Zen Badger Wrote: So ANY sexual act that is not directly related to producing babies is immoral? be it hetro or homo it's against god?We're only talking secular morality Zen. All sexual acts are a result of the species need to reproduce.
(October 8, 2011 at 7:21 am)Zen Badger Wrote: So presumabably older couples who can no longer have babies because of simple biology are sinners destined for hell if they have sex of any description.What you and Kitchie do within your four walls is your business mate
The natural biological drive might still be there long after the salmon have all spawned up river. I can't see how the old dog should be punished for following his instincts