RE: What is "natural" anyway?

From: Shuan Rose (shuanr@boo.net)
Date: Thu May 16 2002 - 12:25:12 EDT

  • Next message: Dawsonzhu@aol.com: "Re: What is "natural" anyway?"

    The odd thing about the natural law argument is that two can play that game.
    Consider the bonobo, close relative of Man. They have been found to engage
    in casual sex of every description, htero and homosexual. Read about them at

    http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html

    In light of this, perhaps Kamilla may want to modify her appeal to what is "
    natural' as an argument about human sexuality.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    Behalf Of Glenn Morton
    Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 8:37 AM
    To: Kamilla Ludwig; asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: RE: What is "natural" anyway?

    In response to my note about death statistics in pregnancy, Kamilla wrote:

    >
    >So? It is an illegitimate move to equate the propagation of the species
    >with buggery.

    Kamilla, I didn't make any comparison with buggery. I merely pointed out
    that Tim was correct with pregnancy. Don't go further than that. If yo want
    to counter Tim, get a better argument than than the one you used.

    glenn

    see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
    for lots of creation/evolution information
    anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
    personal stories of struggle



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 16 2002 - 12:48:54 EDT