As I read your reply to Heywood, I see that you accept the logic but not the content, i.e. since in your mind, homosexuality isn’t immoral then Heywood’s objection doesn’t apply. My reply to whether or not homosexuality is harmful self and others is that even if it is, it’s not harmful enough to justify legal prohibitions and restrictions on personal liberty.
But making it a purely moral issue cuts both ways. If the issues around homosexuality are only differences of opinion about morality, then making pro-gay public policies amounts to forcing your liberal secular irreligion onto others, in clear violation of the establishment clause of the 1st Ammendment (in the USA).
But making it a purely moral issue cuts both ways. If the issues around homosexuality are only differences of opinion about morality, then making pro-gay public policies amounts to forcing your liberal secular irreligion onto others, in clear violation of the establishment clause of the 1st Ammendment (in the USA).
