Quote:
Originally Posted by kerry
I saw nothing in Botnst's post which cast moral aspersions on homosexuals, whereas yours was filled with them. Hence its plausability depends upon a moral judgment whereby homosexuals have more moral weaknesses than heterosexuals.
Normal has huge variations amongst species. Some species have a substantial contingent of homosexuals, others don't. Some of our primate relatives have lots of 'deviants', others don't.
|
Your looking for moral aspersions when there are none. Just like you elected to use the word "deviants" which I have not! I was scrupulous to only use the adjective "deviant" to delineate behavior outside of the biological imperative which is the norm for every species that has ever existed or will exist.
My "plausibility" has nothing to do with morals or moral judgement anymore than black hair vs. blonde hair, blue eyes vs. brown eyes, two legs vs. 3-4-5-6 or any number of appendages does.
I understand that perhaps you're feelings are hurt by any lack of agreement with your position that there is no difference between homosapiens that conform to the biological imperative and those who can't, don't, or won't!