Archives for posts with tag: sex

Wonderful perspective on the bogus arguments used to support things like Prop. 8.

Human beings took our animal need for palatable food . . . and turned it into chocolate souffles with salted caramel cream. We took our ability to co-operate as a social species . . . and turned it into craft circles and bowling leagues and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. We took our capacity to make and use tools . . . and turned it into the Apollo moon landing. We took our uniquely precise ability to communicate through language . . . and turned it into King Lear.

None of these things are necessary for survival and reproduction. That is exactly what makes them so splendid. When we take our basic evolutionary wiring and transform it into something far beyond any prosaic matters of survival and reproduction . . . that’s when humanity is at its best. That’s when we show ourselves to be capable of creating meaning and joy, for ourselves and for one another. That’s when we’re most uniquely human.

And the same is true for sex. Human beings have a deep, hard-wired urge to replicate our DNA, instilled in us by millions of years of evolution. And we’ve turned it into an intense and delightful form of communication, intimacy, creativity, community, personal expression, transcendence, joy, pleasure, and love. Regardless of whether any DNA gets replicated in the process.

The “Virgin Birth” — how did that work, exactly? Did God use one of Mary’s ova, and add a sperm of his own? (By the way, how can he make a sperm — or any thing at all — if he’s immaterial? And when did he make it, if he’s eternal?) Or, did he implant a ready-made zygote — or an embryo — or a fetus? Which was it? And in all of these cases, did he adjust Mary’s hormone levels to prevent rejection? If so, how was the adjustment carried out? — if not, how did he prevent rejection?

Those are ridiculous questions. It was a miracle. Maybe you’re unclear on the concept.

I think you are the one who is unclear. The details of the miracle matter very much, for the following reason: if you can’t tell me how it happened, then you can’t tell me what you believe.

I believe that Jesus was born without Mary having had sex with a man. That’s called the Virgin Birth.

But how was it done? So far we have, “In December of one year she was a virgin; in December of the following year she had a baby.” Unless we know more, this is not actually a very unusual story.

In between, there was a miracle!

But what does that mean? The word is supplying no information. Is that what you believe? — god did something magical, but we don’t know what?

He made a baby!

But human couples do that every day.

But he did it in a different way.

Different, how?

There was no man! There was no sex!

Don’t tell me how it wasn’t, I want to know how it was. Let me put it this way: how was what God did more miraculous than two humans having sex? I mean, that way is pretty amazing. What did God do that was more amazing than that?

How could I know that?

I have no idea how you could know! — but if you don’t know, then how are we to understand what it is that you are saying that you believe in? You are amazed and inspired by God’s having done… what?

As far as I can tell, to say it was a miracle is the same as saying you don’t know what happened. Does it make sense to call that a belief? “I believe in something, but I don’t know what exactly” — is that what you’re telling us?

I believe I hate you. Actually, I am quite certain of it.

As far as I can tell, the idea of divine intervention does not mean anything. It is incoherent. Your “belief” in miracles does not just lack empirical support; the very idea is without meaning. Rational rebuttal is unnecessary, because you have made no specific claim. The truth is, I am rapidly losing interest in this topic.