Nature, Ethics, and Gay Dolphins
The other day I saw an advertisement for a documentary about homosexuality in nature called Queer Planet. The description of the series says:
Take a worldwide journey exploring the rich diversity of animal sexuality — from flamboyant flamingos to pansexual primates, sex-changing clownfish, multi-gendered mushrooms and everything in between. This documentary looks at extraordinary creatures, witnesses amazing behaviors, and introduces the scientists who are questioning the traditional concept of what’s natural when it comes to sex and gender.
There was a bit of a social media meltdown over this promo with people complaining about the needless “queering” of nature.
Look, I don’t want to get into debates about Judaism, Scripture, sexuality, and nature, but I do want to offer a few caveats about the perils of appeals to nature in ethical reasoning.
First, the realm and experience that is called “nature” is not a neutral sphere. What is regarded as “nature” and “natural” is very much constructed on the basis of a particular cultural framework. For instance, those of us with access to the Discovery Channel and who love walks in the forest may think of “nature” as a thing of wonder and beauty to behold. Yet for those poor souls who are forced to etch out a pre-industrial living in the Amazonian rainforest, or in the Sahara desert, they may regard “nature” as an enemy of one’s mortal existence and something that is savage as it is inescapable.
Mother Nature is a woman of great beauty, but she’s a merciless murderer too!
Second, many philosophies regard nature as normative. For instance, in Stoic philosophy, the natural world is divine, so that natura was a virtual god, known by common instinct, and ingrained within the very fabric of one’s own being. For the Stoics, natural law directs people to select what is natural for them and to reject what is contrary to nature. Virtue consists of acting in accordance with the law of nature. Moreover, people have tried to argue that all sorts of things are true because they accord with nature, ranging from Capitalism to Marxism, from egalitarianism to patriarchy. In fact, the argument against homosexual practices from nature can be turned on its head. Many today will argue that homosexuality is natural because it is programmed into people’s genetic make-up and that queer and same-sex attracted animals are ubiquitous among species which somehow legitimates homosexual behavior for homosapiens.
This is the line that I guess is being taken in “Queer Planet.” Now on a biological or zoological plane all of this stuff about animal reproduction and bonding is very interesting in its own right, but it’s when you try to apply this to human ethics, mores, and law that it gets complicated and even, well, weird.
To read further, consider joining the “Aviary” by taking out a paid subscription, only $7 per month or $75 per year, supports me in my ministry and scholarship, and gets you 3-4 posts per week on biblical studies, Christianity and gender relationships, cultural commentary, book reviews, previews of my forthcoming books, and some cool videos.