Yea! I got a response to my post at the Humanist News blog yesterday. This post will not make sense if you do not read my post "Discussion with the Humanists" first.
In response to what I wrote yesterday, Fred Edwords respectfully commented:
Thank you, Hurts, for providing the opposing bookend. It lets us know that we aren't critiquing a straw man.
I'll just pick one thought out of the bushel.
You seem to agree with the idea of your "natural desires being unquestionably sinful." Isn't it interesting, then, that those evangelicals who call homosexuality sinful often argue that the proof of its sinful nature is that it is (somehow) "UN-natural." Does this mean that ALL desires, both "natural" and "unnatural," are sinful? And, if so, why then would the supposed unnaturalness of a given desire offer any special proof of its sinfulness worthy of mention?
As for our natural desires being sinful, why would we need forgiveness for exercising them? Shouldn't God be asking our forgiveness for saddling us with such supposedly evil urges?
Oh, I know, all that sin is supposed to have started in the Garden of Eden. But that legacy could no more be my fault than would a crime committed by a parent or ancestor. I'm an individual who is innocent until proven guilty, not guilty because of something in my family history. Thus I don't need to secure forgiveness for anything Adam or an ape might have done thousands or millions of years ago.
Here was my response: