FREE TAPATALK APP

iamivy · 5th February 2008, 06:57 AM

I was filling in a poll on the US candidates running for Presidency to find whose ideals do I share most in common with.

One of the questions was about Gay marriage to be made legal. I was sat next to a friend and I exclaim her 'Good grief, why should this be a question at all? Ofcourse it should be and about time. After all marriage is a man made institution.' My friend retorts 'no, it is against nature'

So this thought occured to me if we find nature as sort of an entity that dictates, though not directly, how we lead our lives.

LordoftheLeftHand · 5th February 2008, 07:03 AM

Well even if it was "against nature" (whatever that means), is that any reason to make it illegal?

LLH

Francesca R · 5th February 2008, 07:03 AM

By and large, human beings are pretty good at beating nature into a cocked hat.

Denver · 5th February 2008, 07:06 AM

Some people will equivalate nature with God in statements such as your friend made, which would make nature a dictating entity. Others might slide it more toward natural law, which while sometimes meaning a law that comes from God, also can mean the environmental circumstances which produced and sustain life. So while in that sense it is not an entity that dictates, it can still be thought of as the source of behavioral imperatives necessary for survival.

So to answer your questions: it depends on what the person means when they say 'against nature'.

Beerina · 5th February 2008, 08:29 AM

Originally Posted by LordoftheLeftHand

Well even if it was "against nature" (whatever that means), is that any reason to make it illegal?

Exactly. "In the image of God" means your mind, and your ability to manipulate nature. That's the whole purpose of it, unless you think the actual purpose is to sit disembodied in a vat someday.

Of course, there are "practical" issues, too, but again, that's what the brain is designed to tackle. After all, your nose isn't designed to take your finger, either. Should that be illegal?

Beerina · 5th February 2008, 08:32 AM

Of course, all this crap was written by pre-scientific savages who had no concept of the atomic theory of matter, of relativity and quantum mechanics, of the chemical nature of life, of data processing and discrete and analog computing.

Modern savages should stick to buying the HDTVs their intellectual superiors invent for them to buy, and stop commenting on the nature of reality.

"Dude, you scored in the bottom 5th percentile in math. That's so low, you don't even understand what it means."

Tormac · 5th February 2008, 10:03 AM

Homosexuality occurs in many other species besides humans (I understand it is found in most primates and dolphins for example).

If homosexuality was really “against nature”, I would not expect to find it in other species as often as it is.

Tricky · 5th February 2008, 10:11 AM

Just about every combination you can think of exists in the animal world. In bees, though the queen and the drone provide the genetic material, not a single larva would develop without the intervention of the worker bee "nannies". It is much the same case for Californians.

Redtail · 5th February 2008, 10:26 AM

When I was in the Army quite a few people in my unit would say it was against nature. I responded with "Dude... we jump out of airplanes!!! Hell you wanna talk 'nature'? I don't see wings on us, what the hell are we doin up there in the first place?!?!?"

Loss Leader · 5th February 2008, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by acuity

By and large, human beings are pretty good at beating nature into a cocked hat.

You should listen to acuity. She is, without question, the foremost authority on things that are cocked.

KingMerv00 · 5th February 2008, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by iamivy

I was filling in a poll on the US candidates running for Presidency to find whose ideals do I share most in common with.

One of the questions was about Gay marriage to be made legal. I was sat next to a friend and I exclaim her 'Good grief, why should this be a question at all? Ofcourse it should be and about time. After all marriage is a man made institution.' My friend retorts 'no, it is against nature'

So this thought occured to me if we find nature as sort of an entity that dictates, though not directly, how we lead our lives.

Following that line of though:

Nylon doesn't occur naturally and is therefore against nature.
Jumping fights gravity and is therefore against nature.
Living past 35 requires medical care and is therefore against nature.
Birth control is OBVIOUSLY against nature.
Buildings defy entropy and therefore are against nature.

Humans are natural. Nothing we do can violate nature.

El_Spectre · 5th February 2008, 01:51 PM

Meh, disease, famine, disgusting parasites and nuclear explosions are all part of "nature" too. It's a rather meaningless term.

Skibum · 5th February 2008, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by Redtail

When I was in the Army quite a few people in my unit would say it was against nature. I responded with "Dude... we jump out of airplanes!!! Hell you wanna talk 'nature'? I don't see wings on us, what the hell are we doin up there in the first place?!?!?"

That reminds me of a dirty joke about a jumpmaster with a huge...

CaptainManacles · 5th February 2008, 02:08 PM

so is civilization.

citizen327 · 5th February 2008, 02:29 PM

It's kind of like when she said "nature" she meant "the way things ought to be," obviously not a scientific sort of definition. And if people really knew how things ought to be, the world would be a lot better than it is. It's just not a good argument...

DanishDynamite · 5th February 2008, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by iamivy

I was filling in a poll on the US candidates running for Presidency to find whose ideals do I share most in common with.

One of the questions was about Gay marriage to be made legal. I was sat next to a friend and I exclaim her 'Good grief, why should this be a question at all? Ofcourse it should be and about time. After all marriage is a man made institution.' My friend retorts 'no, it is against nature'

So this thought occured to me if we find nature as sort of an entity that dictates, though not directly, how we lead our lives.

Nature is nature. Most people are pretty ignorant about it. For example, even homosexual acts seem to occur in nature. So please, if anyone ever uses such ridiculous phrases as "against nature" again, ask them what exactly they mean.

Darth Rotor · 6th February 2008, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by Denver

Some people will equivalate nature with God in statements such as your friend made, which would make nature a dictating entity. Others might slide it more toward natural law, which while sometimes meaning a law that comes from God, also can mean the environmental circumstances which produced and sustain life. So while in that sense it is not an entity that dictates, it can still be thought of as the source of behavioral imperatives necessary for survival.

So to answer your questions: it depends on what the person means when they say 'against nature'.

Coolest malogism I've seen in a while. You did put the E into JREF for me,

as I had to look equivalate up to see if it's a word. I wonder why the word "equate" isn't sufficient for any and all purposes this word applies to?

Any wordsmiths about who can help out here?

As to the topic, I'll offer the analogy of the one way check valve, two way check valve, for your consideration, and leave it as an exercise for the reader.

In support of acuity's point, the Cod fishing fiasco of the mid 20th century demonstrated that now and again, where Man exerts will and energy, parts of Nature get arse kickings. The irony is, in so kicking arse, that Man discovers many an episode of "shooting self in the foot" : the hunger for Cod didn't go away with the (figurative) strip mining of it.

DR

Number Six · 6th February 2008, 08:41 AM

Another way you hear nature referred to as an entity is when people use the phrase "That's not what nature intended," as if nature conscious thing with intentions. It's interesting that it is used by both left and right at times. The right uses it in reference to social issues, as if nature dictates how society and families and sex should be set up. The left uses it in reference to food and environmental issues, as if the way things are without intervention from humans is the way things should be.

As far as gay marriage goes, I'm in favor of allowing gay civil unions and hetero civil unions too but I don't think they should call it marriage. That's just sticking a thumb in the eye of the people that don't like it and it's unnecessary. Give everyone equal legal rights to join together in a civil union with whoever they like and then let each church marry or refuse to marry whoever they like.

5th February 2008, 06:57 AM	#1
iamivy Thinker Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 136	Is nature an entity? I was filling in a poll on the US candidates running for Presidency to find whose ideals do I share most in common with. One of the questions was about Gay marriage to be made legal. I was sat next to a friend and I exclaim her 'Good grief, why should this be a question at all? Ofcourse it should be and about time. After all marriage is a man made institution.' My friend retorts 'no, it is against nature' So this thought occured to me if we find nature as sort of an entity that dictates, though not directly, how we lead our lives.
iamivy Thinker Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 136	Last edited by iamivy; 5th February 2008 at 06:58 AM.

5th February 2008, 07:03 AM	#2
LordoftheLeftHand Dominus Sinistrae Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 1,186	Well even if it was "against nature" (whatever that means), is that any reason to make it illegal? LLH
	__________________ What though the field be lost? All is not lost—the unconquerable will, And study of revenge, immortal hate, And courage never to submit or yield - Milton, Paradise Lost

5th February 2008, 08:29 AM	#5
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: A floating island above the clouds Posts: 23,835	Originally Posted by LordoftheLeftHand Well even if it was "against nature" (whatever that means), is that any reason to make it illegal? Exactly. "In the image of God" means your mind, and your ability to manipulate nature. That's the whole purpose of it, unless you think the actual purpose is to sit disembodied in a vat someday. Of course, there are "practical" issues, too, but again, that's what the brain is designed to tackle. After all, your nose isn't designed to take your finger, either. Should that be illegal?
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

5th February 2008, 08:32 AM	#6
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: A floating island above the clouds Posts: 23,835	Of course, all this crap was written by pre-scientific savages who had no concept of the atomic theory of matter, of relativity and quantum mechanics, of the chemical nature of life, of data processing and discrete and analog computing. Modern savages should stick to buying the HDTVs their intellectual superiors invent for them to buy, and stop commenting on the nature of reality. "Dude, you scored in the bottom 5th percentile in math. That's so low, you don't even understand what it means."
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right? Last edited by Beerina; 5th February 2008 at 08:34 AM.

5th February 2008, 10:03 AM	#7
Tormac Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 399	Homosexuality occurs in many other species besides humans (I understand it is found in most primates and dolphins for example). If homosexuality was really “against nature”, I would not expect to find it in other species as often as it is.
Tormac Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 399	__________________ Anything is possible when you don't know what you are talking about.

5th February 2008, 07:03 AM	#3
Francesca R Girl Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London EC1 Posts: 11,826	By and large, human beings are pretty good at beating nature into a cocked hat.

5th February 2008, 07:06 AM	#4
Denver Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 6,680	Some people will equivalate nature with God in statements such as your friend made, which would make nature a dictating entity. Others might slide it more toward natural law, which while sometimes meaning a law that comes from God, also can mean the environmental circumstances which produced and sustain life. So while in that sense it is not an entity that dictates, it can still be thought of as the source of behavioral imperatives necessary for survival. So to answer your questions: it depends on what the person means when they say 'against nature'.

5th February 2008, 10:11 AM	#8
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,403	Just about every combination you can think of exists in the animal world. In bees, though the queen and the drone provide the genetic material, not a single larva would develop without the intervention of the worker bee "nannies". It is much the same case for Californians.
	Last edited by Tricky; 5th February 2008 at 10:13 AM.

5th February 2008, 10:26 AM	#9
Redtail Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 9,396	When I was in the Army quite a few people in my unit would say it was against nature. I responded with "Dude... we jump out of airplanes!!! Hell you wanna talk 'nature'? I don't see wings on us, what the hell are we doin up there in the first place?!?!?"
Redtail Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 9,396	__________________ AVENGERS!!!.. Turn off the dark!

5th February 2008, 10:34 AM	#10
Loss Leader Opinionated Jerk Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New York Posts: 11,890	Originally Posted by acuity By and large, human beings are pretty good at beating nature into a cocked hat. You should listen to acuity. She is, without question, the foremost authority on things that are cocked.
	__________________ Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader This force is receiving all the right to vote through the use of magic. - Miernik Wieslaw <NEW> VOTE FOR ME JUST BECAUSE <NEW>

5th February 2008, 01:41 PM	#11
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by iamivy I was filling in a poll on the US candidates running for Presidency to find whose ideals do I share most in common with. One of the questions was about Gay marriage to be made legal. I was sat next to a friend and I exclaim her 'Good grief, why should this be a question at all? Ofcourse it should be and about time. After all marriage is a man made institution.' My friend retorts 'no, it is against nature' So this thought occured to me if we find nature as sort of an entity that dictates, though not directly, how we lead our lives. Following that line of though: Nylon doesn't occur naturally and is therefore against nature. Jumping fights gravity and is therefore against nature. Living past 35 requires medical care and is therefore against nature. Birth control is OBVIOUSLY against nature. Buildings defy entropy and therefore are against nature. Humans are natural. Nothing we do can violate nature.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?

5th February 2008, 01:51 PM	#12
El_Spectre Lizard Scum Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Arizona Bay Posts: 1,206	Meh, disease, famine, disgusting parasites and nuclear explosions are all part of "nature" too. It's a rather meaningless term.
	__________________ Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. - Ambrose Bierce Question your argument if you must mock your opponent to make it... Step 1 in helping spread the skeptical way of thinking: Don't be a jerk.

5th February 2008, 02:04 PM	#13
Skibum Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Fredericksburg, Virginia Posts: 1,270	Originally Posted by Redtail When I was in the Army quite a few people in my unit would say it was against nature. I responded with "Dude... we jump out of airplanes!!! Hell you wanna talk 'nature'? I don't see wings on us, what the hell are we doin up there in the first place?!?!?" That reminds me of a dirty joke about a jumpmaster with a huge...

5th February 2008, 02:08 PM	#14
CaptainManacles Muse Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 818	so is civilization.
CaptainManacles Muse Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 818

5th February 2008, 02:29 PM	#15
citizen327 Student Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 30	It's kind of like when she said "nature" she meant "the way things ought to be," obviously not a scientific sort of definition. And if people really knew how things ought to be, the world would be a lot better than it is. It's just not a good argument...
citizen327 Student Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 30

5th February 2008, 03:18 PM	#16
DanishDynamite Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: In the cold Posts: 10,802	Originally Posted by iamivy I was filling in a poll on the US candidates running for Presidency to find whose ideals do I share most in common with. One of the questions was about Gay marriage to be made legal. I was sat next to a friend and I exclaim her 'Good grief, why should this be a question at all? Ofcourse it should be and about time. After all marriage is a man made institution.' My friend retorts 'no, it is against nature' So this thought occured to me if we find nature as sort of an entity that dictates, though not directly, how we lead our lives. Nature is nature. Most people are pretty ignorant about it. For example, even homosexual acts seem to occur in nature. So please, if anyone ever uses such ridiculous phrases as "against nature" again, ask them what exactly they mean.
	Last edited by DanishDynamite; 5th February 2008 at 03:18 PM.

6th February 2008, 08:26 AM	#17
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,371	Originally Posted by Denver Some people will equivalate nature with God in statements such as your friend made, which would make nature a dictating entity. Others might slide it more toward natural law, which while sometimes meaning a law that comes from God, also can mean the environmental circumstances which produced and sustain life. So while in that sense it is not an entity that dictates, it can still be thought of as the source of behavioral imperatives necessary for survival. So to answer your questions: it depends on what the person means when they say 'against nature'. Coolest malogism I've seen in a while. You did put the E into JREF for me, as I had to look equivalate up to see if it's a word. I wonder why the word "equate" isn't sufficient for any and all purposes this word applies to? Any wordsmiths about who can help out here? As to the topic, I'll offer the analogy of the one way check valve, two way check valve, for your consideration, and leave it as an exercise for the reader. In support of acuity's point, the Cod fishing fiasco of the mid 20th century demonstrated that now and again, where Man exerts will and energy, parts of Nature get arse kickings. The irony is, in so kicking arse, that Man discovers many an episode of "shooting self in the foot" : the hunger for Cod didn't go away with the (figurative) strip mining of it. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 6th February 2008 at 08:32 AM.

6th February 2008, 08:41 AM	#18
Number Six JREF Kid Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,017	Another way you hear nature referred to as an entity is when people use the phrase "That's not what nature intended," as if nature conscious thing with intentions. It's interesting that it is used by both left and right at times. The right uses it in reference to social issues, as if nature dictates how society and families and sex should be set up. The left uses it in reference to food and environmental issues, as if the way things are without intervention from humans is the way things should be. As far as gay marriage goes, I'm in favor of allowing gay civil unions and hetero civil unions too but I don't think they should call it marriage. That's just sticking a thumb in the eye of the people that don't like it and it's unnecessary. Give everyone equal legal rights to join together in a civil union with whoever they like and then let each church marry or refuse to marry whoever they like.
Number Six JREF Kid Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,017