Re: Homosexual Marriage (aka digging up a hot-button topic)
Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:57 pm
Of course you are right that there is a norm. I can't speak for why precisely they would deny sexual norms. On one hand, they may just deny all ethical norms. Or they may just try to deny it in this specific case by using there own sexuality as a counter-example for the "norm" of heterosexuality. Then there's the whole libertarian assumption that "right and wrong" don't really matter so much as not doing something to harm someone else being the only prescriptive "standard," blah, blah, blah.PaulSacramento wrote:I hear what you are saying and I see your point and, I myself have been there on the receiving end of that intolerance.
What I don't get is the whole "there is no norm for sexuality".
I mean, there is a norm for virtually everything else right?
NORM:A designated standard of average performance of people of a given age, background, etc.
Normal:Conforming to a standard or common type.
See, we can say that homosexuality is normal based on this view:
Biology, Medicine/Medical .
a.
free from any infection or other form of disease or malformation, or from experimental therapy or manipulation.
b.
of natural occurrence.
YET, that sets us up for a slipper slope, to suggest that because something is a natural occurrence that it is the norm is probably not the road we want to go down for obvious reasons.
You ought to read the book by Feser I mentioned above. It goes into this in a lot of detail.
In what manner?BryanH wrote:Ok...
One quick question though: did you formulate this comment in this manner on purpose?