Homosexuality and unnaturality
Recently, in the course of several discussions with homosexuality, I've realised that many people tend to discriminate against on the grounds that it is unnatural, or 'not normal'. The following post will address this failed idea.
Deviation from the norm != unnatural. That holds true by necessity: norms are discriminatory by design, i.e., you can't have a norm without also having deviations from that norm.
For the sake of argument, I grant you your definition of unnatural, i.e., 'Anything that is a deviation from the norm is unnatural'. By even invoking 'unnatural', you are establishing naturality as an axiomatic property of all things, which takes universal scope. So: For any thing, XOR(natural, unnatural). Since naturality takes universal scope, everything you ever have and ever will be conscious of (or, if you want to deny atemporal consciousness, everything which has and will affect your genetic memory) has a 'natural' value to it, i.e., 1 v 0. However, in order to take anything as an argument, you are forced to discriminate it from the whole of your experience; universally, an object is an object in virtue of its deviating from the norm of your experiential scope. So, really all you're left with is solipsism, because all things that you can possibly identify except your own consciousness are by definition unnatural.
In context, your definition of unnatural commits you to this statement: "Homosexuals are unnatural... just like everything else."
On a grander scale, it also has the curious effect of commiting you to rejecting any conception of a God greater than yourself.
Deviation from the norm != unnatural. That holds true by necessity: norms are discriminatory by design, i.e., you can't have a norm without also having deviations from that norm.
For the sake of argument, I grant you your definition of unnatural, i.e., 'Anything that is a deviation from the norm is unnatural'. By even invoking 'unnatural', you are establishing naturality as an axiomatic property of all things, which takes universal scope. So: For any thing, XOR(natural, unnatural). Since naturality takes universal scope, everything you ever have and ever will be conscious of (or, if you want to deny atemporal consciousness, everything which has and will affect your genetic memory) has a 'natural' value to it, i.e., 1 v 0. However, in order to take anything as an argument, you are forced to discriminate it from the whole of your experience; universally, an object is an object in virtue of its deviating from the norm of your experiential scope. So, really all you're left with is solipsism, because all things that you can possibly identify except your own consciousness are by definition unnatural.
In context, your definition of unnatural commits you to this statement: "Homosexuals are unnatural... just like everything else."
On a grander scale, it also has the curious effect of commiting you to rejecting any conception of a God greater than yourself.
posted by benisonp at 5:02 AM
0 comments
