Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion.”
Leviticus 20:13- “And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 are quite direct and exact. The simple question is why is man lying with another man abomination? Or would it be enough to argue that the mere fact that “God” interpreted through a cryptic prophet has stated so that this is true. The death penalty for sexuality is also illegal (in western civilisation) in a contemporary context meaning this is in no way applicable.
What is abomination?
Abomination-”The Biblical words usually translated abomination do not always convey the same sense of moral exceptionalism as the English term does today, as it often may signify that which is forbidden or unclean according to the religion.
To put this into a colloquialism, “acting on natural homosexual desires is wrong because a deity stated that it was wrong.”
Regarding bestiality, personally I have entire moral objection to any sexual act encapsulates an animal and human. But the matter is that humans are animals, in fact we are separated from chimpanzees by a tiny 1.2-% of our genetics. This is NOT to say, that bestiality is correct, but merely to prove the way in which the quote was written is not exact and one cannot expect people to blindly follow an ideology, especially when we have the scientific resources that humanity has at it’s disposal in a modern context. The issue has also been raised, why it is apt for myself to postulate that a man may indeed, love another man, woman and woman, but not a human and animal. But then I would merely state that an animal has no capacity to state its desires. No form of communication to articulate its innermost thoughts. Therefore it would be wrong to love, lay or anything in between with a being that has no choice in the matter. People also postulate that animals lack the capacity to love in the same manner as humanity. Sex in the contexts of animals, is for the sole purposes of reproduction. Whilst animals portray facets of a maternal love, this is not the love of which I speak. The love that transcends, body and flesh, love between two consenting adults, a love that sets the heart of both beings into an uncontrollable fire.
NB: Love between two consenting adults might also be viewed as incestuous, which I am also opposed. However, my logical justification for this, is that the love that a brother, sister, father, mother may experience for their relatives is again, a maternal love. Not a passionate fire, it is a love that is philanthropic, not sexual. The reason that these forms of sexual encounters have a logical immorality attached to them, is that, genetically the bodies are rather similar. It would almost be as loving one self, which is again a different kind of love. In addition to the various physiological diseases that can be created through the doubling up of genes – What kind of intrinsic, morally just love would go on to harm another living being?
No comments:
Post a Comment