For decades those opposed to homosexual normalcy and homosexual marriage have made it clear that there’s a larger agenda in view. Polygamy, pedophilia, and now the end of monogamy are on the table. Supporters of homosexuality didn’t want to talk about this slippery slope, but the logic of their position was inevitable given that there is no moral standard other than the desires of the individual.
The secularists would love to sweep the entire slate clean of any memory of the marriage relationship as it was established by God. Take God out of the picture, and everything and anything is permissible.
According to journalist Meghan Laslocky, whatever is “natural” must be right, and it’s all based on science:
“It’s time for our culture to wake up and smell the sex pheromones: monogamy is not natural for many, or probably even most, humans.
“With people living longer than ever before, a greater tolerance toward the human impulse to experience sexual variety is needed. Whether a person succeeds at being sexually monogamous depends as much on biology as environment.”
There you have it. Biology is determinative. “Only 3% to 5% of all the mammal species on Earth ‘practice any form of monogamy.’ In fact, no mammal species has been proven to be truly monogamous.”
Laslocky, following your children’s science textbooks, states, “Biologically, we humans are animals. So it makes sense to look to the animal kingdom for clues as to what we are built for.” The thing of it is, Laslocky is selective in her choices of animal observations and behaviorial comparisons.
If we’re going to use “other mammals” as moral examples, then we have a problem of the highest order. What constitutes “normal” (moral) among mammals?
Consider the case of Timothy Treadwell depicted in the movie Grizzly Man. He lived among bears for 13 years and thought of them as his “family.” In 2003, Treadwell and his companion, Amie Huguenard, were mauled and mostly eaten by one of the Alaskan grizzly bears he considered to be “All in the Family.”
While he thought of the bears as his brothers and sisters, the bears thought of him as lunch. For the bears, this was “normal” behavior. As far as I know, the bears were not convicted of any crime.
Then there’s the case of Armin Meiwes who killed and ate 43-year-old Bernd-Jurgen Brandes.1 What did Mr. Meiwes do that was wrong given the premise that animal behavior is a normative model for human behavior?2
If the bears that ate Treadwell were only doing what came naturally, then how can the cannibal nature of Meiwes be judged as abnormal given animal normalcy assumptions?
We mustn’t forget other “natural” animal behaviors. Animals rape on a regular basis. Randy Thornhill, a biologist, and Craig T. Palmer, an anthropologist, attempt to demonstrate in their book A Natural History of Rape that evolutionary principles explain rape as a “genetically developed strategy sustained over generations of human life because it is a kind of sexual selection — a successful reproductive strategy.”
Rape among animals is “normal.” Humans are animals. Therefore, given Laslocky’s premise, and the science of Thornhill and Palmer, rape is normal behavior for humans.
When God is gone, there is no basis for morality. “Normal” is what people do. Moral judgments do not affect normality.
- German cannibal tells of fantasy,” BBC News (December 3, 2003). [↩]
- Theodore Dalrymple, “The Case for Cannibalism” (January 5, 2005). For a more detail telling of the story, see Nathan Constantine, “A German Revival,” A History of Cannibalism: From Ancient Cultures to Survival Stories and Modern Psychopaths (Edison, New Jersey: Chartwell Books, 2006), 186–191. [↩]