I have little problem with homosexuality, and indeed think it is a vital, necessary and indeed beautiful part of God's universe.
Homosexual behavior is documented for some 2000 animals in the animal kingdom, including humans, penguins and swans. Even Aristotle in his writings made note of this in hyenas and dogs.
Now in these same-sex relationships the individual animals and indeed in studies of homesexual human relationships, they show exactly the same ability to parent as a normal heterosexual couple, and the child shows none of the supposed 'ill-effects' that many religious people claim are caused by a child being brought up with two same-sex parents and can form healthy sexual relationships themselves in later life.
Now my theory is that the existence of such couples, is a contingency plan built into Nature to ensure that those children who lose their parents (in our earliest days, the risk of death of one of the parents was VERY high). And so homosexual couples are the product of evolution: a kind of cosmic godparents who can care for and raise orphaned children. It's an irony that this is (to me at least) an element of design which the religious ignore in their theories of design.
Also think of this: why do modern societies divide sexuality by gender? It's little different to dividing sexual preferences by hair color. I've yet to hear a GOOD argument as to why gender is different to any other division of sexual preference and why it should be the defining one. Fact is that the human sexual organs are designed to be stimulated somehow, and it doesn't matter how this is done, it will give the same pleasure and stimulate the same biological response (hormonal and all that).
Add this to the argument I made in the first paragraph and it seems ridiculous to be 'against' homosexuality. Human sexuality is highly complex and there's no such thing as definite sexualities and definite sexual labels.
And yes, I happen to be bisexual. So this is a bit of a hot topic for me...
|