(no subject)
Oh. the board's backfired again... Well, not really, but there's some sort of "how does one define gay and what would the church say or whatever"-discussion going on.
I won't address the actual debate, anyone who's interested should read it and get an opinion of their own, but ot sorta' interferes with the subjects I've been thinking of writing an essay about: How there, in nature, can exist no thing that is "unnatural".
I was thinking like so: If you claim that something is unnatural, you set it apart from nature. My thought is that if it exists, it was "meant to be". Quotationmarks because I don't mean "meant to be" as in decided by a divine power, but simply this: it happened, therefore it is.
Meaning: let's suppouse that someone points out a certain thing as unnatural. From my point of view, the reasons why we're here and life exists is the/mother nature. So, if something exists, it's because nature made it so. The only possible way you could claim something would be "unnatural" would be if it was, literally, alien, because how else would it have gotten here? (Though I think that the whole universe is a part of nature, or vice verse, so that argument doesn't really make sense.)
To continue my thought here; one thing that is often called unnatural is homosexuality. Right. So, in order to claim that homosexuality is unnatural, you must set mankind apart from nature, which I personally think is a big error. Mankind is not above nature, we're part of it. And, as for the rest of nature, homosexuality has been noted amongst (other) animals as well, so... homosexuals are alien? Hmnh.
Nah. That doesn't wrap up my idea too good. Let's try it like this: if you say that "this is a pretty plant, but it doesn't grow here naturally" you often mean that it grows here because someone planted it here, nature never intended that plant to grow here. But wait, isn't the person who planted that flower a part of nature? Couldn't you say that nature did place that flower at that place, only she used a human representative?
Now, the reason why I'd like to write an essay about all this is because I soon realized that this theory gives room to certain things that I'd still like to see as "unnatural", or at least wrong. For example, if anyone should start to claim that pedophilia is natural, since the unnatural doesn't exist, and thereby also OK, I really wouldn't agree with this. I still need to find the correct phrases to my theory.
But the bottom line is that if we can do it, it's natural. That doesn't mean that we should do it.
Oh, and the supernatural doesn't exist, either. That's all natural, as well, IMHO. =p
I won't address the actual debate, anyone who's interested should read it and get an opinion of their own, but ot sorta' interferes with the subjects I've been thinking of writing an essay about: How there, in nature, can exist no thing that is "unnatural".
I was thinking like so: If you claim that something is unnatural, you set it apart from nature. My thought is that if it exists, it was "meant to be". Quotationmarks because I don't mean "meant to be" as in decided by a divine power, but simply this: it happened, therefore it is.
Meaning: let's suppouse that someone points out a certain thing as unnatural. From my point of view, the reasons why we're here and life exists is the/mother nature. So, if something exists, it's because nature made it so. The only possible way you could claim something would be "unnatural" would be if it was, literally, alien, because how else would it have gotten here? (Though I think that the whole universe is a part of nature, or vice verse, so that argument doesn't really make sense.)
To continue my thought here; one thing that is often called unnatural is homosexuality. Right. So, in order to claim that homosexuality is unnatural, you must set mankind apart from nature, which I personally think is a big error. Mankind is not above nature, we're part of it. And, as for the rest of nature, homosexuality has been noted amongst (other) animals as well, so... homosexuals are alien? Hmnh.
Nah. That doesn't wrap up my idea too good. Let's try it like this: if you say that "this is a pretty plant, but it doesn't grow here naturally" you often mean that it grows here because someone planted it here, nature never intended that plant to grow here. But wait, isn't the person who planted that flower a part of nature? Couldn't you say that nature did place that flower at that place, only she used a human representative?
Now, the reason why I'd like to write an essay about all this is because I soon realized that this theory gives room to certain things that I'd still like to see as "unnatural", or at least wrong. For example, if anyone should start to claim that pedophilia is natural, since the unnatural doesn't exist, and thereby also OK, I really wouldn't agree with this. I still need to find the correct phrases to my theory.
But the bottom line is that if we can do it, it's natural. That doesn't mean that we should do it.
Oh, and the supernatural doesn't exist, either. That's all natural, as well, IMHO. =p