One of the reasons I think it is so easy for some to judge others based on their sexual orientation is because sexuality cannot be seen.  Not that you couldn’t “see” two people having same-sex intercourse, but what I mean to say is that a person’s sexual desires are an internal mental state, and not something visible you can determine just by looking at someone.  Because mental activity is generally viewed in terms of “choosing,” this makes it very easy for a person to look at someone’s physical characteristics (i.e. male/female), and then determine what their appropriate mental attitude should be regarding those of the same or opposite gender.  This is usually a pretty comfortable place for those who like to keep sexuality a black or white issue, but things get a little murky and confusing for them when you introduce them to a category they are likely unfamiliar with: intersex.

“Intersex, in humans and other animals, is the presence of intermediate or atypical combinations of physical features that usually distinguish female from male. This is usually understood to be congenital, involving chromosomal, morphologic, genital and/or gonadal anomalies, such as diversion from typical XX-female or XY-male presentations, e.g., sex reversal (XY-female, XX-male), genital ambiguity, or sex developmental differences. An intersex individual may have biological characteristics of both the male and the female sexes.”

With the introduction of intersex individuals, things become much more difficult to explain from the perspective of religious texts.  What does the Bible or the Koran say about someone who has a vagina and a penis?  Or a vagina and testicles? Or a penis and ovaries?  Or ovaries and testicles?  Can they go either way?  Can they only have sex with other intersex individuals?  If a person with a vagina and testicles has sex with someone with a penis and ovaries, is that a homosexual relationship, or do the opposites cancel each other out?  Perhaps the best course of action is to let the 109,000+ born each year love and have sex with whomever they want, because it’s their body, and they know better than anyone who they are, and no one has the right to tell them otherwise.

Now let’s take a step back for a moment because if you thought sexuality was all neat and tidy before, I have a hunch you’re at least willing to admit that maybe it’s not as tidy as you thought it was.  Is it not reasonable to acknowledge that if external sexual characteristics cannot be chosen, such as with the cases of intersex individuals — that the internal sexual characteristics of those in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community are also not chosen?  Is it also not reasonable to acknowledge that because we see intersex specimens among other species in the animal kingdom, as well as homosexual and bisexual behavior among other animals, that this behavior would be expected in certain percentages of humans as well?

I’ll leave you with part 1 of this excellent documentary on intersex individuals.  If you have not seen it previously, I highly recommend that you watch it, no matter what side of the fence you happen to be on concerning human sexuality.  If nothing else, you’ll come out a little more informed about a little-known issue than you were before.

If the highest court in the land took up the case and made a decision in support of the lower court decision, then it not only establishes that same-sex couples in California have the right to get married — it establishes that same-sex couples in every state have the right to get married.  People opposed to gays and lesbians having the right to marry typically consider that a bad thing, and I don’t think the conservative members of the court will want to pick up the case.  So, instead of doing the right thing, and settling this issue once and for all, they will let the ruling in California stand by refusing to hear the case.  In the off chance that they do decide to hear the case, it isn’t going to end well for the opponents of same-sex marriage in that case either.

Let’s think about a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that overturned the rulings of the lower courts.  What exactly would that mean?  In essence, it would mean that voters in various locations could pass laws prohibiting the marriage of consenting adults that happen to fall into a certain group or category they don’t particularly like, such as, interracial couples.  In fact, if you look at the arguments against same-sex marriage, they’re pretty much identical to the arguments that used to be put forth against interracial marriage, and they’re equally as wrong.  The fact of the matter is — Section 1 of the 14th Amendment pretty much puts all arguments to bed…

“…nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” 

Whether it’s interracial marriage, same-sex marriage, or heterosexual marriage between two people of the same race; the government does not have a right to deny liberty to a specific group of citizens, just because a larger group of citizens thinks the smaller group is icky.  Here in the United States, the rule of law is the U.S. Constitution — not the Bible.

Sam Harris has a new book due out on March 6th called, Free Will, which is about (you may have guessed it) free will, or in reality, the lack there of.  I’ve got my copy on pre-order ($3.99 for Kindle Version), and it should be delivered to my Kindle the day it comes out.  If you think you have free will, I would encourage you to read it, but if you don’t, the choice wasn’t yours to begin with.  ;)

Many people are disturbed by the idea that they do not have free will, though I don’t think they should be.  Like any other bit of knowledge gained that challenges previously held thoughts, beliefs, and convictions – reality itself did not change, only your awareness of it did.  When people discovered the earth was round, it did not therefore mean it was flat before their change in perspective.  They simply made a discovery that gave them a more accurate view of their place and position in the universe.  Learning that free will is an illusion is no different.

Some individuals are concerned with potential social impacts as a result of people being aware that they do not have free will.  The philosopher Daniel Dennett is one such person, who has criticized neuroscientists like Sam Harris for writing books that show free will to be an illusion.  He considers it reckless, and is concerned that people will use it as an excuse for antisocial and destructive behavior.  Instead of “The devil made me do it,” he’s concerned people will say, “My brain made me do it.”  I think his fears are for the most part unwarranted, but also understandable.  Human beings are seldom worried about their own actions in given situations, but are almost always worried about what “the other guy” will do.  While there may be people who latch onto a deterministic view as an excuse for their misdeeds, I think for the most part, people in general will be quite reasonable, and their behavior is not likely to change for the worse.  I’m hoping Sam will address and respond to some of these concerns and criticisms from people like Dennett in the book, and possibly alleviate understandable, but ultimately unwarranted fears.

Again, I highly encourage you to pick up Sam’s new book when it comes out in March.  If you believe you have free will currently, I’m sure Sam will challenge you a great deal on that belief.  In the meantime, you can watch the video below as an introduction of sorts to get you thinking, and possibly entice you to pick up the book if you weren’t planning on doing so already.

Lost and Found

My wife and I recently upgraded our mobile phones (Droid X2 in case you’re curious), and as a general rule of thumb, I never pay extra for phone insurance.  Two days after getting her phone, my wife was nice enough to brush the snow off of my truck one morning before taking the kids to school.  As I left for work, I notice something partially exposed in the snow, just a couple feet from my driver’s door.  It was my wife’s new phone!  It was in just the right place for me to notice it!  It could have fallen out of her pocket on the other side of the truck, in front of it, somewhere in the yard on the way to my truck, and it could have easily been buried in the snow, but there was just enough of it showing to where I noticed it.  It’s a non-miracle!

However, if I was someone who believed the universe, karma, a deity, or some other outside agent was looking out for my best interests on a daily basis, what do you think the odds are that I would have attributed finding my wife’s phone, which was in the best location to be found, to some outside supernatural force?

Christian#1: Fluffy, happy, religion sucks, Jesus is my homeboy perspective…

Christian#2: Hey bonehead, Christianity is religion, and Jesus started it perspective…

Atheist: Hey bonehead, Christianity is a religion, but it still isn’t true perspective…