If its good for penguins its good for me?

In a recent column by Mark Marford in the San Francisco Chronicle, he posits that God is "slightly gay" because research continues to discover homosexual behavior happening in most animal species. 

His argument is summarized pretty well in this quotation:

Because if homosexual/bisexual behavior is universal and by design, if gender mutability is actually deeply woven into the very fabric of nature itself, and if you understand that nature is merely another word for God, well, you can only surmise that God is, to put it mildly, much more than just a little bit gay. I mean, obviously.

But let's be fair. That's not exactly true. God is not really gay, per se. God is more... pansexual. Omnisexual. Gender neutral. Gender indeterminate. It would appear that God, this all-knowing and all-creating and all-seeing divine energy that infuses and empowers all things at all times everywhere, does not give a flying leather whip about gender.

Now the column is somewhat confusing because on one hand he is tweaking Christians for saying that homosexuality, in the eyes of God, is sin.  But on the other hand, in this argument he defines a decidedly unChristian view of God.  He talks of a panentheistic god--a god who is one with creation itself.  In other words, as creation is, so is god.

This wrong starting point is a problem but we'll pretend it isn't there for the purpose of discussion.  We'll pretend that we're both talking about God in the same way as we engage the discussion of sexuality.  If that's the case, here's my summary of Mumford's argument:

Because most animal species display many different sexual behaviors including homosexual sex, we see that God designed sex to be done many different ways and still be "right" or "good".  And because animals do it many ways, people should too.  This is what God wants.  We're just slow to embrace what God has given us.

This is a strange argument.  One which, if applied to other animal behaviors, would lead to a very new set of rules.

• Many animal species eat their kids.  (Especially the weak ones. And dad animals seem especially keen on eating their kids.)  God made animals to eat their kids.  Eating your kids is universal and by design.  People should stop being so squeamish and eat their kids too.  (Wait, maybe we already do...)
• Animal murder happens all the time.  (Male animals especially love to kill other male animals that want their woman friends.)  God made animals to kill each other.  Animals killing animals is universal and by design. People should kill each other.  Murderers need protection--they're just embracing the way God made them.

Or... maybe determining what behavior is acceptable to God by pointing to animal behavior is just, well... dumb.  Christian theology never comes close to saying, "every act of nature reflects God's creative purpose and is therefore good."  It says, instead, creation has been subjected to pain and suffering and confusion because of the sin of people and is anxiously waiting for God to restore things back to His intent before the sin of mankind.  Romans 8 kind of stuff.

Maybe we should work on other approaches for solving moral issues than using animals as our reason for doing whatever we please.

Comments

[Mo]

"Or... maybe determining what behavior is acceptable to God by pointing to animal behavior is just, well... dumb."

Ding, ding! I think we have a winner.

I think people use this sort of argument because it is a widely-held assumption that humans are merely highly evolved animals.

But as you've illustrated, the comparison breaks down when we look at other animal behaviors.