And what about gay sheep??
Submitted by Ringo on 2002-12-2 22:10:49, Monday
In reply to When did we all become Platonists?? submitted by Ringo on 2002-12-2 19:32:13, Monday
|
I read a news item on Yahoo! last week that talked about just such a thing (rams that would only mate with other rams, even in the presence of females. They ignored the females and went right for the males) as evidence that homosexuality may just be genetic after all. If this is true, what does this means to people who hold homosexuality to be immoral? Can someone be genetically immoral? Where is the choice in this, the "giving in to the temptation of Satan and turning your face on what is natural in God's eyes"? Cause, I mean, last I checked, sheep didn't hold to any over-arching set of values, except maybe that grass = good. And, apparently, so is gay sex. Anyone want to field this? Seriously, if this is true I don't see how you could hold homosexuality to be a state of immoral sin. If it is part of WHO I AM AS A HUMAN BEING, at the genetic level (the part of me which cannot be changed and cannot be held to conform to any dictate of man), it cannot be wrong. Unless me being white is wrong. Or a man. Or having big feet. Or lots of body hair. Anyone??? Ringo |
Follow ups: