Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fahadkhan 2398 days ago
Assuming the omnipotent creator exists. If he/she/it doesn't exist then the question is hypothetical.
1 comments

Exactly. It's important to distinguish those two questions:

A. Does a creator exist?

B. If so, would it care about where we put our sexual organs?

I see those often conflated: "There can't be something from nothing, so the universe must have been created, so the Bible must be true!" -- Eh. WAT?

A is an important question, but a completely different subject altogether.

B would follow from A being true, and how the question is answered depends on the nature of the creator and his relationship with his creation.

Some might the Deist route and say that the watchmaker wound the watch and walked away. I argue for a creator that cares deeply about human flourishing on an individual, interpersonal, and societal level, and would thus want to regulate something that is immensely consequential for all of these spheres.

There's an idolatry angle as well, but I don't wanna branch this thread too much.

> Why would an omnipotent creator (who deals with Stars/Earth/Moon/All living Species) care so deeply what we do with our reproductive organs?

Why would a Creator create humans and then not care deeply about them?

Your question reflects an underlying "anthropomorphising of God" fallacy.