Submit Do not compare animals to your situation. Two male flour beetles will mount each other one even producing sperm on the other so that if he finds a mate it will be the other beetles sperm impregnating the female therefore maximising the chance of having offspring, still reproduction purposes. Female albatrosses pair for life because the shortage of males in their groups mainly because males migrate but if two females pair they have a chance at raising ones offspring and surviving. Males mount other males for dominance and just like all apes females will mount females in order to make more fertile and encouraged for a male.
Without context, quoting verses is meaningless. It is like the person whose idea of Bible study was to open the Book to two verses at random per day, untill the day he picked first Matthew Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
Paul is creating a word picture of the absolute worst sinners imaginable, so that when he says to his readers, "Don't be so smug, you are just as bad as they are," loose paraphrase of Rom 2: Too many people focus exclusively on verse 1: I have not seen enough of your posts to know whether or not you do this, but many others I have encountered both here and in other venues do.
This also applies to unnatural sexual practices. But then we need to ask "What are unnatural sexual practices? Nowhere is there any reference to nature.
Those phrases, are, however, technical terms used by Greek philosophers. By the time of Paul, they had leeched into ordinary Greek the way "pop-psychology" terms have entered colloquial English in our time. So why was Paul using "pop-philosophy" terms? Well, although he would use them that way later in the letter See Romans 11he was not doing so here.
He was quoting a Greek philosopher.
Specifically, he was quoting a passage from Plato's dialogue Laws: And whether one makes the observation in earnest or in jest, one certainly should not fail to observe that when male unites with female for procreation the pleasure experienced is held to be due to nature, but contrary to nature when male mates with male or female with female, and that those first guilty of such enormities were impelled by their slavery to pleasure.
This leads to two questions, "Why was Paul quoting Plato?
He had never been to Rome, and knew only a few of the Church leaders. He did not know the "flock" at all. He was planning to visit and to ask the Roman churches for financial aid for the poor in Asia, and this was his letter of introduction.
Another concern was the spread of legalism. Some Christian leaders were saying that Christians needed to adhere to all of the Jewish regulations -- in effect saying that one had to convert to Judaism before he could convert to Christianity.
See also Paul's letter to the Galatians, and Acts So Paul wanted to show that the Law cannot save, and that the salvation through grace is outside the Law. When he wrote to the other churches, he could simply remind them of what he had discussed and preached when he had been there, but he'd never been to Rome.
He did know what most of the people read, though. So, in showing that the real purpose of the Law is to illuminate the sins of man, he chose to reference passages that he knew his readers were familiar with.
For the Jewish-born Christians his main text was Wisdom Again, one preparing himself to sail, and about to pass through the raging waves, calleth upon a piece of wood more rotten than the vessel that carrieth him. For verily desire of gain devised that, and the workman built it by his skill.
But thy providence, O Father, governeth it: Shewing that thou canst save from all danger: Nevertheless thou wouldest not that the works of thy wisdom should be idle, and therefore do men commit their lives to a small piece of wood, and passing the rough sea in a weak vessel are saved.
For in the old time also, when the proud giants perished, the hope of the world governed by thy hand escaped in a weak vessel, and left to all ages a seed of generation.The words for “natural” and “against nature” refer not to our subjective experience of what feels natural to us, but to the fixed way of things in creation.
The nature that Paul says homosexual behaviour contradicts is God’s purpose for us, revealed in creation and reiterated throughout Scripture. What is a good argument against recognizing a constitutional right of same-sex couples to marry?
(1) WHAT IS A GOOD SOCIAL POLICY ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACTS?
Ultimately, the “homosexuality is unnatural” argument fails to support the case against same-sex marriage because there is no clear and convincing content to the concept of “unnatural” in the first place. The observation of homosexual behavior in animals can be seen as both an argument for and against the acceptance of homosexuality in humans, and has been used especially against the claim that it is a peccatum contra naturam ("sin against nature"). The state does not mention the argument because as we said, it mounts no moral arguments against same-sex marriage.” Baskin v. Bogan, F.3d , (7 th Cir. ) (emphasis added).
As of , the year the Supreme Court decided Obergefell v. I can see why a church would decide not to have same-sex marriages performed in their church but actively campaigning for discrimination against secular same-sex marriage or calling them sinners etc.
seems like an overreaction. The argument to normalize homosexuality is based on social reasoning, and not an appeal to nature. Anyone who appeals to nature in an attempt to normalize homosexuality must also concede that every other sexual orientation .
Not trying to avoid the question, but at the end of the day arguments against gay marriage are irrelevant. Gay marriage is not a matter of if, but when. It will happen, nationwide, and so the real key is ensuring it happens sooner rather than later. The observation of homosexual behavior in animals can be seen as both an argument for and against the acceptance of homosexuality in humans, and has been used especially against the claim that it is a peccatum contra naturam ("sin against nature").