Thanks for the input. There's a lot of fodder for thought.



This got me thinking.
I think I can safely assume that just because homosexuality is innate doesn't make it 'justified' (aka naturalistic fallacy, or appeal to nature.)
Sorry for the lack of a better word.

Homosexuality seems (at least to me) to be quite a shaky topic. And I think it is so, because it's just a specific case of moral luck. And the consequence is something that not everyone can agree too.

Your version of a god seems more like a superhuman than the conventional version of god.

There is also another class of gods that wasn't considered in the banner: an omnitemporal god - you can't exist in the past, present or future if you're timeless.

Also a 'future god' wouldn't work with the conventional definition of god because of a couple of circular arguments. If the universe created god X and then god X created the universe, who started it all? If god X is the pinnacle of (objective) morality and existence, then how are we judging morality already without our 'measuring unit'?