If we are "born that way" and therefore our sexual desires are immutable then one can be born with a sexual desire toward the opposite sex, same sex, animals, children, inanimate objects and so on.
The moment one says any particular sexual desire is wrong they have made the "born that way" argument mute; that is, whatever the sexual desire one may be born with, it is viewed through the prism of a moral standard.
We are human beings with physical bodies made for sexual relationship with the opposite sex. As human beings we also have a will and thus autonomy to determine our actions and thus must consent.
- Opposite-sex sexual relationships can fulfill both these standards.
- Same-sex sexual relationships can only, by definition, fulfill the consent clause. But human bodies are not made to engage in a same-sex sexual act. Since it fulfills the consent clause it shouldn't be made illegal as it once was but neither should moral condemnation against it be illegal.
- Sexual relationships with children, even an opposite-sex child who willingly participates, has violated the consent clause because we recognize the child until some age cannot fully understand the dynamics of sexuality.
- Sexual relationships with animals (or inanimate objects) violate consent also because animals do not have the autonomy to give consent. But it also violates the first principle: an animal is not a human and our bodies are not made for sex with animals. Thus, a "disturbing" story about "inappropriate contact with a calf".
- Same-sex sexual relationships can only, by definition, fulfill the consent clause. But human bodies are not made to engage in a same-sex sexual act. Since it fulfills the consent clause it shouldn't be made illegal as it once was but neither should moral condemnation against it be illegal.
- Sexual relationships with children, even an opposite-sex child who willingly participates, has violated the consent clause because we recognize the child until some age cannot fully understand the dynamics of sexuality.
- Sexual relationships with animals (or inanimate objects) violate consent also because animals do not have the autonomy to give consent. But it also violates the first principle: an animal is not a human and our bodies are not made for sex with animals. Thus, a "disturbing" story about "inappropriate contact with a calf".
If we our "born that way" and thus cannot bring moral judgement then ALL sexual attractions are allowed.
The "Wokes" of our society hide this TRUTH under the mantra of equality. But it is only "equality" for their anointed sexual desire.
And to display intellectual honesty would reveal that the "Wokes" were lying to us all along.
