I don't think it is true, but a conservative friend of mine does. Is homoesxuality a disease?
When I look at my son I see an amazing young man. He was born gay and certainly not diseased. I'm thankful that in this generation, people are more accepting.
If it is a disease then so is heterosexuality.
Also being gay isn't just about sex, it's who you want to be with emotionally.
Not but it's not natural, it's somehow acquired.
Natural: existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind. Not only does it exist naturally in humans, but it does in other species. It didn't come out of thin air and it's not manufactured, so the only logical conclusion therefore,
is that it is natural.
It isn't caused by nature. By every theory of how man got to where they are today, whether it be evolution or creation, nature has made man compatible with the opposite gender. This is supported by creation, natural selection, evolution
So then where did it come from if it is not natural? Did some fairytale character come up with it, despite the fact that it is observed in hundreds of species throughout nature, including humans?
Your claim that it contradicts evolution is proven
Simple, it's a choice, not natural. Just because it is studied in nature doesn't mean it is natural. Whatever divine power is responsible for putting humans on this planet, made two sexes, not one
false through the observation of one group of the most closely related species in the evolutionary chain, Old World (catarrhinc) primates. Catarrhine males will sometimes show a
But I believe on quality rights for gays because I don't discriminate, I just don't agree
preference for a male partner and will compete with other males for such a partner. The same behavior has been shown across other species, also.
And since you most clearly can't comprehend the definition of natural...
When did you choose your sexual preference? Have a specific time, date and location for that?
Gay or straight isn't about sex, it's about love, the sex is just how you choose to express it.
Yes, exactly. So what is your point, exactly? Do you not love anyone who is the same sex as you, though you may not be attracted to them sexually? Its about love. And love is a natural chemical reaction within the brain. So, again, it is most
clearly in line with the definition of natural, and the correct answer to this question would be no.
My point is that acting on homosexual feelings isn't natural, or being gay isn't natural. The process of reproduction is the point if sex, you can't do that if you act on gay urges
Should I repost the definition of natural, or...? I don't get what's so difficult to understand about that. It IS natural, even the acting upon it. And sex serves multiple purposes beyond reproduction. It is really a self-fulfilling urge and action.
It's natural, perhaps, that some have those temptations and desires. It's something a small portion of the population feels. But dicks weren't made for sword fights and pussies weren't made for taco smashing. A little vulgar, maybe, but it's truth.
Homosexuality is unnatural; it's about love and not sex. Sex is about reproduction. You can't reproduce if you're gay.
See the disconnect?
I could be gay if it wasn't for the sex. Then just a couple dudes hanging out.