Immorality of Homosexuality

Well let me play devil’s advocate.A non-religious argument might be: One might suggest that in the traditional family structure (the extended family, not the nuclear family) homosexuality is less valuable to the clan as a whole and hence less moral, as it interferes with the creation of political/economical alliances, etc. Some have tried to argue that not intentionally not passing on one’s family’s name is disrespectful (another form of immorality) towards one’s parents.Since you said that “The Bible says so” and did not say, “Because God says so” I’ll offer up “Because God says so”. I offer this up as they are not the same. There are by the way people who believe that God speaks to them.When I was still a Christian I convinced myself that many of the seemingly contradictory answers different Christians received while praying was due to asking different questions. It was my opinion that people while praying usually asked rhetorical questions. To me it seemed clear that, “God if two people love each other and are not hurting anyone how can that be wrong?” was not the same question as “God, surely your plan is not for people to do disgusting things, can it?”If we can make a case for the eating of ice cream as immoral we can make one for pretty much anything. There are certainly applications of the Golden Rule which I would find immoral. For myself the larger question is why does society care so much even assuming it is immoral? There are certainly sins in the Bible given far more weight. Neo-cons regularly vilify homosexuals while electing adulterers and liars to office.

You do seem to acknowledge that traits can be biologically determined and yet still not specifically selected for. No reason a trait couldn’t be a disadvantage to certain types of extended family groups. Presupposes no such thing as the argument is about marriage/political affiliations as was common in those cultures. I am speaking of marriage being used to cement/bolster the power/influence of people who are not those being married. Think of not being able to marry off a child as a lost business/political opportunity. This specific argument is a social and not biological one.Ultimately if obeying your parents/leaders is what is viewed as moral, then not obeying them would often be viewed as immoral. Are you familiar with the medieval worldview of ”chain of being’. Are you agreeing that point two meets the criteria in your OP? It feels like it is meant to be a dissent, but I can’t see that it actually is an argument against. I was going to put this in a separate message, but felt it might then drag the topic off somewhat. I wonder if there is enough here for its own topic. If you really would like to talk about it in depth I’m game if you want to start a thread.
Parents want their children to do better then they, but seem to rebel at the thought of their children thinking too differently from themselves. I realize there are exceptions to this. Education, especially liberal education often asks the children to question what they believe is true. This, I believe, is originally why I think the shift was make from critical thinking towards critical regurgitation and why schools now worship at the altar of the Test. It may be that neo-cons cut the funding for the reasons you cite now, I still believe that what got us to this point was parents panicking over the ”strange ideas’. Edited by Trae, : addendum: responded to school comment.

It would be foolish to try to deny that the vast majority, as in over 99%, of those in prison drank milk at some point prior to commiting their crime. It would be equally foolish to suggest that ice cream was not primarily concentrated milk. We don't need any scientific study to see what is so plainly clear with common sense.