Short response to crazypantsness.

[sarolynne]

Okay, so I've stayed up way too late reading a slightly out of date homophobic (among other things) LJ screed. And I might actually write something actually thoughtful about this sort of thing later, after I've slept, if I still feel the need

Comments

[llamrei]

I've taken classes on evolutionary biology and psychology, and yeah, nature isn't exactly something the homophobes would find useful, if they actually did their research.

[sarolynne]

Yeeeeah, in so many ways, not useful. But research always seems to get in the way of a good slippery slope argument.

[llamrei]

Well, obviously they don't want to do research if it means they'll be wrong.

In the meantime, nature will just laugh and go on its merry way.

[sarolynne]

That is pretty much what nature does best!

[nilladriel]

omg THIS. :/ Please do not be confusing your own moral values with universal, all-encompassing... anything.

[sarolynne]

I wish more people got that.

[lady_aquill]

*COUGH* i don't believe i've commented on your LJ before so i'll quickly say Hi!
I would like to point out though that there is a large flaw in this argument against homosexuality that i have run across before and take a large amount of glee in pointing out.

Homosexuality can't be un-natural/against nature/blah blah blah, -if it actually happens in nature-.

there are, i believe, about 50 documented species of animals that display homosexual behavior (not just the sex with same sex either but acutal life pairings that include adopting baby orphans too!XD). the ones that i can remember are Lions and Flamingos
and, and, i'll stop ranting there >.<;; sorry about that

[sarolynne]

Yes, I know. And I agree.

And that never sinks in, so I have no idea why I would think this sort of thing would actually get through the layers of ignorance either.

When I was in high school, we used to have some finches, and we knew nothing about finches because we ended up taking them from a friend of the family after his wife had a care accident, and they couldn't care for all of their pets anymore. So we had these four finches, and two were male and two were female, and the guy told us that was because they'd be happier paired off.

One of the males paired off with one of the females, and they happily did their little birdy thing. While the other female watched. And the other male did his damnedest to court the other male. It was actually sort of sad, because the other female seemed lonely, and the gay male bird never got the message and just kept trying to impress the other male with his cute singing/dancing routine.

Look at that. Homosexuality. In birds. :

[nilla]

What's more, even if something were against the laws of nature, nature wouldn't care. Not if you're an atheist, or an agnostic, or even just a person looking for a naturalistic explanation. You know, like you do in science? Nature just is. It's not a god. It doesn't have a purpose. It's not good or bad. It's just the way things are. And nature includes homosexual behavior.
SO. MUCH. TRUTH!!!!

[sarolynne]

How stupid do you have to be to believe that nature shares your moral.

[joisbishmyoga]

I kinda hate to play devil's advocate here, even if it's just for a paragraph, since I actually want gay rights and such, but... well, nature also allows rape, murder, and abuse, and racism is a "natural" expression of a reasonable mistrust of strangers (people outside the community, people with no investment in helping the community survive, people who don't necessarily know or play by the community's rules). The "nature does/doesn't allow it" argument doesn't hold water.

That's why, in my opinion, we have to work for equal rights and fairness in the system-- because nature won't do it for us.

If there's any higher entity, that's what s/he gave us sapience and free will for: not to blindly obey some set of laws from on high, but to take responsibility for our own damn selves.

[sarolynne]

I don't actually think you're playing devil's advocate, because I agree--which is why I pretty specifically said that nature isn't good or evil because it doesn't care. This isn't meant to be an argument for gay rights on the grounds that it's natural. I would be for gay rights even if I thought homosexuality were a choice, because it seems like a choice everyone should have a right to make. The only thing I'm trying to do is show that the people who use homosexuality's unnaturalness as an argument against the full inclusion of gays in society, since it is, in fact, perfectly natural.

Personally, I think the whole natural argument ought to be debunked and then quickly set aside because nature is not really on any of our sides.