[clue-talk] How do CLUEbies vote?

[Sean LeBlanc]

On 09-28 18:35, David L. Willson wrote:
> People are born gay, brown-haired, alcoholic, skinny, lazy, short,
> crazy, and easy-going.  Being born with a predisposition toward a
> behavior or attitude does not define it as healthy.

That's true...saying so would be an is/ought logical fallacy, IIRC. But
assuming we are talking about homosexuality people make arguments against on
the grounds that it's against nature (absolutely not true, it happens in
nature) and against God (irrelevant argument for many).
 
> The majority of people can become disconnected from "healthy".  Just
> because "everyone says so" doesn't make a thing true.  Sometimes, things
> are logically provable,  and yet the majority of people will
> emphatically deny, to preserve their self-interest.  Watch where the
> bread is buttered.  Question more stringently an ethic any person,
> including you, espouses, when that ethic happens to go in their/your
> favor.

My point was to point out the flawed argument of
Ahmidloonyboonybin...proving the absence of anything is really hard for
almost any object of concern, and he just came off goofy. Like I said, that
sort of propaganda might fly in his country; at least in public, people
don't laugh and point at him for saying such absurdities. Again, could have
been a mistranslation/gaffe on his part, but still funny (at least to me). 
 
Really, I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm not gay. One could say that I
do have a bias, because gay men leave more women for me if I was a
philanderer, but on balance, lesbians probably balance out that difference.
:)

So I really don't care in a personal way. I can't even claim some of my best
friends are gay.  

Homosexuality used to be thought of as a mental disorder, IIRC. It will be
interesting to see what happens if a gay gene(s) are discovered, and gene
therapy could remove that trait. I know there are such a thing at the
"militant deaf" who object to people regaining their hearing; I wonder if
the gay community would feel the same way about people aborting their babies
because they will be gay and/or doing gene therapy to "correct" it. [*] 

So, too, will this be interesting discussion I'd like to hear from (some)
Christians if they are faced with the fact that God does make people
predisposed to breaking his law as they see it. Their primary objection, as
I see it, is that God wouldn't make someone fundamentally "flawed" in such a
way as to be unable to follow his laws. People who are drawn to eating
lobster doesn't seem to draw as much concern as being gay, but there you go. 


[*] As I said earlier, that book on Transhumanism discusses things that I
think almost no one in public sphere has touched on. People will feel like a
UFO touched down on the White House lawn when some of this stuff becomes
available, and ethicists will be going into overdrive trying to cover all
this stuff.

 
> The overall affect of the behavior on the survivability of the
> individual and the community determine right/good/healthy.

I suppose. I would point out that phrasing sounds like the utilitarian code
of ethics, not Christian, though. And I'm not sure people being gay
threatens that in any way. 

I also don't think the Bible keeps a wave of homosexuality from breaking
out, personally. 

If someone could objectively prove that gays being out fundamentally harms
society, maybe things might be different.  

> And which one of you said that guilt and shame are not normal and
> healthy responses to unhealthy behavior?  Are you ready to defend that
> position?  'Because I'm ready to start attacking it.

I didn't, and I'm not sure evolutionary psychology even agrees with that. I
know I've seen dogs and cats look pretty ashamed...

-- 
Sean LeBlanc:seanleblanc at comcast.net  
http://sean-leblanc.blogspot.com/
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. 
-Victor Borge 
(contributed by Chris Johnston)