Subject:
|
Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Dec 2000 21:59:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
426 times
|
| |
|
|
Mr. Pieniazek,
Thanks for your interest. You recently interacted with an argument of mine
as follows:
> > Put another way, heterosexual sex brings with it the
> > possibility of procreation (however remote, or blocked
> > by contingent factors it is); homosexual sex cannot do
> > so even in principle.
>
> This happens to turn out to not be actually true if one
> steps outside the human species. Further it's not true
> in principle for humans today, and as medical science
> continues to advance, soon it won't be true in actuality.
You won't hear me argue about morality for species other than human beings,
so the first point is irrelevant. I'm wondering how it isn't true in
principle for humans today, and as medical science continues to advance.
I'd be glad to learn more about that.
> If you are going to argue against homosexuality and
> against relationships as being "unnatural" you are first
> going to have to establish what "natural" is, and PROVE it,
> or else your argument is just a statement of preference.
> Is it one which you wish to impose on others, presumably
> by force once you've convinced a majority of the electorate
> to go along, or were you just letting us know what your
> preference was? Based on the christian track record I'd
> suggest the former is more likely.
As others have indicated, this question and any response belongs in a
separate thread. I'll make an effort at answering your concerns shortly, if
you'll look for it.
Thanks and take care,
Steve
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| (...) It has been demonstrated that an embryo can be implanted into the abdomenal cavity of a male mammal and brought to term through the application of hormone therapies and medical supervision. The experiment I read about involved a male baboon (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| (...) You're going to have to admit that humanity is subject to the same genetic rules as other species, for starters. Once you grant that, you're all set. *All* you need to do is construct a mechanism for taking the genetic material of the two (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| (...) This happens to turn out to not be actually true if one steps outside the human species. Further it's not true in principle for humans today, and as medical science continues to advance, soon it won't be true in actuality. (...) What does the (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
