Is the Condemnation of Homosexuality Universally Immoral?
I know. Sounds like an odd question, but it's one posed to an atheist recently based on all the condemnation of those who believe homosexual practice is sinful. He was objecting to the idea of universal, objective morality. In the process of this, he asked what kind of "objective morality" condemns homosexual love. He was condemning those who objected to homosexuality. So the above question was asked. He refused to answer. Why? Because he knew his answer would place him into that universal, objective morality category that he was fussing about.
If he had said, "yes," then he would be required to produce the standard that made it immoral. If he had said, "no," then it goes against his preferential feelings about those who condemn homosexual practice. He finally admitted it was his opinion. Opinion? "You're going to condemn those who disagree with you based on your mere opinion? And you fuss about religious people?"
But maybe there is another option. We recognize that there are false dichotomies. Often there is another option. One could even explain the yes or no options. Nothing.
Of course, we can replace "homosexuality" in the above question with just about anything else: murder, adultery, stealing, torturing babies, spousal abuse, etc., etc. You get the idea.
They can't have it both ways, and I think we need to press the point. Those who have become nihilists (a philosophy of meaninglessness) cannot suddenly find meaning in something and still maintain their consistency.
Don't be afraid to stand up for what's right. We may feel at times that such discussions do no good. But if all we can do is, as Greg Koukl says in his book "Tactics," put a little pebble in their shoe -- something that might bother them enough to rethink their position -- then we can still be effective even if we don't see immediate results.
Live I Peter 3:15.
