Nowhere357

Btw, notice he again responds to the refutation of one of his assertions (two posts above) by - putting his head in the sand!

Bree

Time magazine had an editorial entitled "Why Same-Sex Marriage is a Conservative Issue" or something similar. The author (a gay male) theorises that gay individuals need the same sort of marital model as straight individuals. In essence, if you grow up with the goal of marriage in mind, your dating patterns will be different than if you didn't have the option of marriage. While I don't agree with the idea, it's certainly something to think about.

Groovy Cosmic Monkey

So... are you going to refute the argument or...?

yguy

I find your argument irrefutable - because it's too loathesome to contemplate.

Alonzo Fyfe

Well, actually, a more serious problem -- in order to have an 'intended purpose' there has to be an 'intender', and we have to know what the 'intender's' intention was.

Without an intender, there is no intended purpose.

Of course, even if there is an intender, and an intended purpose, the idea that there is something wrong with using something other than for its intended purpose is a bit . . . um . . . problematic.

I have a tool box that I use for a doorstop. My exercise machine sometimes serves as a clothes rack on Sunday evenings, and I sometimes use a ruler to prop open my bedroom window at night.

Clearly these uses deviate from their 'intended purpose'. Yet, I have a hard time mustering up any sense of guilt over this. In fact, people do this type of thing all the time. So what?

Let's also add . . . women using earlobes to hang jewelry from, I use the bridge of my nose and my ears to hold up my glasses, and football fans paint their bodies with numbers and letters. Was that the intended purpose for skin? (Not that I am entirely innocent of this skin -- I do not attend football games but I have used my hand to write down a quick note when I had no paper available).

By the way, this is an argument that I bring up in my most recent addition to my Ethics Without God series.

There is no 'intended purpose'. And even if there was, so what?

Groovy Cosmic Monkey

And this, I suspect, is where your real objection to homosexuality lies - your own personal disgust at gay sex.

I cringe when I see ugly people kissing. To say that their having sex is immoral or unintelligent on the basis of my disgust is not an argument to be taken seriously. Neither, I suspect, is yours.

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): I think you should just say "I find your argument irrefutable.", and leave it at that. Your squeamishness is a very transparent cop-out.

scigirl

But. . . . that's why our creator gave us a nose, didn't you know?
...
I have asked cretinists this question before - If god thought the penis was so special and only belonged in the holy vagina, than why did he run the urethra through it? If the penis can excrete piss, than who cares if it goes in a rectum?

Furthermore, women have "anal sex" whether they want to or not, since the damn anus is so freaking close to the vagina and urethra and they can get f****** UTIs from just having vaginal sex. Thanks god - you designed us great.

If there was a god, and he really did hate anal sex, than the above fact just doesn't make much sense.

Oh and why did he put the prostate around the urethra and make it so it swells up all the damn time? And why. . . . Oh wait I'm not in the evolution forum - sorry!

scigirl

scigirl

Hey I think it's fine to use squeamishness as a justification for bigotry. I mean - let's pass laws about things that gross us out. I'll start:

1) No parents of teenagers should have sex (cuz, mom and dad, ewwwwww!)

2) Parasites - ewww. They should be illegal.

3) Anchovies. Eww. Yucky. Let's ban them, and deny basic human rights to anyone who eats them, because they are icky.

Makes about as much sense as using middle eastern fairy tales for morality, I suppose.

scigirl

yguy

I suppose it would be a valid complaint if we are today as God originally designed us, which I don't believe. Apocryphal writings suggest that as a result of the fall, A&E were recreated in the image of satan at least in part; IOW, what the human body was before the fall is to its present state as the homecoming queen is before she becomes a drug addict to what the addiction makes of her - although I suspect the contrast between A&E before and after the fall was much more stark.