Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
How does eating the dead harm others?
|
Kuru for one example.
Quote:
Whether or not something is harmful or not is not the point. You used the argument "it occurs in nature" as a defense. It doesn't hold any water whatsoever. Left to nature alone, a newborn human would die before their first month. Other animals are independently able to survive from day one. For humans it is only through society, through the initial love and concern from others, through interdependence with others that we survive.
THAT is what is natural to humans. As such, what is natural is that we establish groundrules for that society to exist and flourish. If one of those groundrule include an emphasis on encouraging healthy males and females to engage in lifelong procreational and family building potential behaviour, then that is that societies perogative.
|
I think you have provided your own answer here - it's patently obvious that "it occurs in nature" that humans will nurture their young until they are able to fend for themselves. Just as many other species do. Humans are part of the natural world after all. To argue that no natural laws or imperatives apply to the human race is utterly specious.
Quote:
Put simply, a society of 100% homosexuals will not survive a generation. We are all the product of hetrosexual activity.
THAT is natural and the law of nature. The fittest survive.
|
Absolutely, however, if homosexuality is so abhorrent to the "natural" order, shouldn't natural selection have consigned it to oblivion? Or (wierd thought) could it just possibly be that homosexuality can actually confer some sort of long term benefits to the human race and that is why it survives ????
