You are in no position to determine what is natural for others.
That is part of the klannish disease...deciding what is right for others, what is natural for others.
If you don't want to marry a guy, I would never want to see you forced to marry a guy.
I also wouldn't want you to be kept from marrying a woman if you lived in a society in which the majority was gay...
How about live and let live, or is that too difficult for you...
Your argument really makes no sense.
Is it natural that human's die, that they get diseases?
Doh!
Yes, of course, completely natural. So some percentage, say 7% of the populations is gay...so that means it is unnatural because the predisposition occurs in a small percentage of a population??
Do you know what percentage are left handed? How about ambidextrous? Leftys and switch hitters are unnatural?
Both are perfectly natural...
I am not saying there are not some confused folks out there who don't know who the hell they really are, some gays have said bisexuals are gay but afraid to admit it to themselves...who knows?
Yet there are genuine people who have been attracted to the same sex from the first moment they had sexual feelings. It is natural for a percentage to have those feelings.
Your argument is crap, no logical foundation at all, when the percentages are put in their proper place, life goes on, it will go on, even with a percentage of the population being gay.
Just accept it, give them their proper rights, and they really won't try to convert you...
Oh and a hermaphrodite is not unnatural either, nor is a priest who genuinely takes a vow of celibacy and doesn't do little boys or other clergy. Occurring rarely is not the same as unnatural. David Bowie has eyes of different color, so what?
It is a choice, personal choice and none of your damn fundamentalist business.
Imagine a society that forced people who wanted to be celibate and devote their lives to God, forced them to marry women and procreate.
Geez, you are a Christian, was it unnatural for the all the Disciples, John the Baptist not to get married and procreate?
Same difference as gays...none of anyone's damn business.
Quote from drmarkan:
You completely missed the point. You took it exactly the way I knew you would. I am not putting down their choice, but this choice whether it is genetic or not, is not natural. If a species decided one day to not procreate, the species is gone.
The way that you attack the question I posed (I did not state that it is a birth defect, I asked for ideas), shows that you as always are looking for a confrontation rather than some type of discourse.
I'm trying to figure out how we would classify the situation because if homosexuality is genetic and not a defect, then there would be something beneficial about it to the human race. Einstein's intelligence is beneficial to us for a number of reasons (hopefully we don't have to veer from the original discussion to elaborate on this point).
There are plenty of highly intelligent and creative people out there who are homosexual. For example, Elton John is a great song writer whose music brings joy to millions of people. He enriches people's lives. This is something that is beneficial. However, if he were heterosexual, the outcome would be the same (probably not the clothes though). It is not the fact that he is homosexual that creates the benefits.
Maybe this will explain what I am trying to say better. When I was in elementary school, I had a friend who was born with his middle finger on his right hand missing. This was a birth defect. Did it lessen who he was as a person? Of course not. It was still a defect though.
Simply stating that somebody is born homosexual doesn't help explain the situation fully. People are born dyslexic, but we know that there are ways to teach many of these people to read. They are not all hard-wired to never be able to read. So the question is can people who are homosexual be changed, or is it something that can never be changed. This is an important point because it shows to people who believe it is a choice that it isn't.
