happydolphin on 20 December 2012
| theprof00 said: 1. yes it does because it's appealing to god as a source of what is right. It's appealing to nature because since it's a natural function, it is the right function. The strawman is misrepresenting the human function to say procreation is our raison d'etre, in order to more strongly argue the other points mentioned above. |
No, in this contect it does not imply that God is a source of what is right. It wasn't part of the original statement.
The original statement: "if god wants us to procreate, why would he make gays."
What it does imply though, is that God is a designer (from "he make gays"), and the question was asking why would a designer who intends procreation allow for relations that don't procreate.
It's not the same as "I'm right because the bible says so".
imho
