I love the fact that this phrase, this commonly used phrase was challenged. I mean, I know what people mean when they use it, but up until today I never truly understood how illogical it really is.

What is natural?

A simple explanation is as follows: if it happens in nature, it's natural. This implies that the concept of natural is somewhat independent from our personal biases and moral convictions.

To be more concrete, the idea that homosexuality is not natural because it violates commandments in some of our religions, is to ignore the actual definition of the word. Does homosexuality happen in nature? Well, the answer is clearly yes, but again this observation is disconnected from ideas of morality and spirituality.

The concept of breaking a natural law is also contradictory. If the law is apparently broken, What's more likely: That we misunderstood nature or that there was a suspension of a constant for that one event?

Nature is amoral

And I guess that's the main point of this little thought exploration. We might see the actions of a cat as evil because it plays with a dying mouse and thus makes it suffer, but the idea that a cat can even grasp the concept is comical to say the least.

The point is that nature just is, it's complex, but it's also easier to understand if we strip supernatural layers from our mental weaving. This however, does not mean that our moral concepts, our social guidelines for a better society are wrong or even misguided. It nonetheless means that when we've said X action is not natural, more often times than not we missed the buck by a long shot.

MenO