Thread: Homosexuality, how can it not be considered an abnormality?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Scientifically speaking, yes it's an abnormality. Evolutionally speaking, yes it's a flaw. .

Thank you. This is all i'm on about. i'm just wondering why some people don't understand this.

Also

Originally Posted by loaf

Its silly really. I don't care who you love, as long as he / she is a human.

Why do they have to be human?

Originally Posted by Thatperson

Why do they have to be human?

Call me old fashioned, but raping animals and getting intimate with objects just doesn't seem right.

That's not a great argument. A conservative dude could say the same about homosexuals and a dude who fucks bicycles would say that you're close-minded and have no business deciding what he can and can't do in his... garage...

You said Love not rape, anyway,

"getting intimate with objects just doesn't seem right. "
Says who? It's not harming anyone. Homosexuality 'just doesn't seem right' to many.

I don't see how you can differentiate homosexuality with object intimacy Try it

EDIT: Exactly, what spartiate said. That.

Originally Posted by Thatperson

Thank you. This is all i'm on about. i'm just wondering why some people don't understand this.

Because the reality we describe with science doesn't know purpose. It's objective... cause and effect. The only people who project purpose is, well people. So biologically speaking it's an abnormality as long as we project an end goal/purpose to the organism. So we say "living things reporduce/strive towards reproduction" or whatever and only then we can say, "homosexual organisms are abnormal because they don't reproduce". The whole statement labeling something, in this case homosexuality, as abnormal, lies on the foundational premise that "organisms should reproduce". But in reality there is no way to detect the "should", It's just a way of categorising things. Saying an actual should exists is what Intelligent Design is all about. In reality all we know about the universe is what happens. And what also happens is homosexuality, therefore, I claim there is no inherent abnormality and neither is there in bestiality or cutting your spleen out with a spoon. Therefore everything that happens is natural.

If people are going to judge actions and persons based on some "biological ought", then they should be fair about it. I'm pretty sure we'd find thousands if not millions of things that are (or more importantly can be percieved as) "abnormal" when putting it beside some biological purpose scale.

In my opinion, homosexuality shouldn't be regarded as some sort of intrinsic, objective malfunction, unless you are some sort of an Intelligent design proponent, or unless you think the purpose created by natural selection and evolution should be upheld as some law, moral or otherwise. So in my opinion, scientifically speaking homosexuality is not unnatural or a malfunction. If we categorise these molecular machines, macro and microscopic, as alive and generalize certain key characteristics, then whose "fault" is it, if some of these organisms don't fit into the categories? A homosexual is only malfunctioning when put beside a set norm for living systems which is reproduction, but who said that it should be judged only by that? As others pointed out, there are ways it can also be seen as an evolutionary "success" instead of a flaw.