Yes, they’re coming in thick and fast. Here’s my reply to the first question, asked by Ryan in Glasgow. Apologies for the sound sync problems – working on it!!
I was wondering what you thought of Gagnon’s use of dodgy statistics (Paul Cameron, the “dutch study” that excluded people over 30 in The Bible and Homosexual Practise. I used to think that it was unfortunate that Gagnon combined serious biblical scholarship with such flawed arguments but then it struck me that if you accepted Gagnon’s “embodied existence” argument then you would expect to see the sort of problems (due to structural incompatibility etc) that said studies attempt to prove. Some evangelicals ,when I make this point, say that other sins doesn’t have scientifically measurable harm but I don’t see how you can accept Gagnon’s premises and not expect evidence of the essential unnaturalness of homosexual unions ( in the same way that I don’t see how someone could believe that God created male and female with different roles whilst accepting completely the – post?- feminist view that gender is just a construct). And presumably , if Gagnon isn’t invoking said studies because they are implied by the conclusions of his biblical scholarships, then they are just an example of spurious anti-gay arguments being promulgated in spite of being inaccurate, which would (from an evangelical perspective) be a worrying thing to concede of the best anti-gay bible-based resource.