So I'm reading Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari and came across this above mentioned line accompanied by, "A truly unnatural behaviour, one that goes against the laws of nature simply cannot exist, so it would need no prohibition." Now I'm not the brightest bulb but this whole line of thinking seems off to me.
The context here is homosexual relationship, for which ofc i do agree, but there are several acts committed by men for example serial murders, rape, pedophilia, zoophilia which just bcoz do exist simply cannot be termed natural and thus cannot not be subjected to prohibition!
I'm not being able to get my point across clearly, english is not my native so forgive me, but i was enjoying this book and this sentence took me out and made me ponder just because somethings are biologically possible does not mean they should be taken as natural bcoz at the end of the day we're not just flash and blood but also complex neurons having developed moral and ethical senses idk what i'm saying.
Anyways what are your opinion on this i.e. how correct is the author?
by Cherei_plum