If homosexuality is OK?

A lot of homophobes have tried to condemn gays for being "unnatural." The "it's natural" is really just in response to that. Like, "Look, you can't use your stupid 'it's unnatural' argument to condemn me, because this kind of thing happens in nature too so obviously it's perfectly natural." Someone wouldn't see a human maul another human and say, "Hey, you shouldn't do that because it's unnatural," they'd say, "Hey, you shouldn't do that because it's hurting someone."

But you're right, just because it's "natural" doesn't necessarily make it okay. Rape is the normal form of insemination in the animal world, and I think we can all agree that that's not okay. The point is, we can't use the "it's natural" argument to defend either side. Unless it is to reassure someone they are not a freak of nature, as the example seems to be.

Science is right on this one the preference of sexuality towards either the same sex or the opposite sex begins early. There are not only genetic traits that help to determine your sexual preference but also the hormone levels in your mother's womb bear a heavy weight on what you prefer.

You seem to already understand this, so why ask? Do you just want re-assurance? If so keep in mind that the Catholic Church has long lived an oppressive rule over humanity and naturally they omitted parts of the bible and 'corrected' some of its teachings.

Since Christianity oppressed a large portion of the civilized world it naturally lead to defining many of its standing and developing cultures. So the end result is symbolized by what we see today. Not sure what took place in other developed countries during the last 500 years but obviously it was frowned upon in those cultures too.

By all means to be gay is as natural as it is to be straight or even bi. And our culture and the culture of the world is slowly shifting toward acceptance of others. But for now most people will reject someone for thinking differently even if it does no harm to them.

You're question is a non sequitur.

Nature and morals can be mutually exclusive.

You're question is based on the false premise that natural is to be equated with permissible, morally.

Earthquakes are natural, are earthquakes "OK"?

That was easy to disprove.

Moreover, I don't know why you're now clinging to what's natural. You're likely sit in your plastic home, with prozac running through your veins, on your computer which is beginning to rival human intelligence. Heck, you're probably sitting across from a jar of Technetium.

Morals should be constructed on the biases of the type of society we want to live in, where bigotries are limited to the minimal and necessary (I have no issue being bigoted against rapists, for example). Homosexual acts between two consenting adults are not immoral; it would actually be immoral to impede on happiness when no harm is being done. Moreover, homosexuality is not just a type of sex, but a type of love and it needs to be recognized as such (Hitchens).

Moreover, is anything really unnatural? Everything in the universe comes from, duh, the universe. Wherein lies the room for the principally synthetic?

You ought to provide the up to date variant. Article from 1972? Did you realize the Witnesses had been smoking cigarets earlier than the time it used to be made recognized smoking can motive lung melanoma? 1988: "Sexually immoral acts dedicated by means of a married man or woman with anybody of the equal intercourse (homosexuality) are filthy and disgusting. Unrepentant people of this kind is not going to inherit God’s Kingdom. And, of path, bestiality is Scripturally condemned. (Le 18:22, 23; Ro a million:24-27; 1Co 6:nine, 10) These grossly filthy acts come beneath the huge designation por·nei?a. It may be noteworthy that, beneath the Mosaic Law, homosexuality and bestiality carried the demise penalty, releasing the blameless mate for remarriage.—Le 20:thirteen, 15, sixteen."

While many animals do run around mauling other animals, they rarely maul their own species, if at all. Therefore, it is not natural for humans to maul other humans.

I would look up which logical fallacy you used but I'm tired and I already disproved your point.

@Lightning From the East: I AM, however, willing to let you know that you used a very standard example of the "slippery slope" fallacy in your second paragraph! Your attempts at making a valid point fail miserably.

@Jesus Saves: And you, like many before you, fail to acknowledge the fact that AIDS has not existed until recently. Not only does it disprove your theory that God sent it to punish gays, it is also evidence for evolution! It's amazing how much people can fail when they refuse to set their mind to it.

You are so hate-filled that I cannot begin to explain it to you.

However, being gay IS a natural (albeit rare) condition. Doubt me? Do the following web search:

brain scan + homosexuality

You will find articles that make it clear. Homosexuality is a condition of birth cause by gestational issues. If someone is born left-handed, do you ridicule them? If someone was born with a withered limb, do you ridicule them? Then WHY do you ridicule someone whose condition was present at birth, long before any choices existed to be made? That's just cruelty, probably brought on by your own ignorance. If you are not afraid to learn, do the web search. Read. Learn the truth.

I believe there is nothing morally wrong with homosexuality, but I disagree with the idea that the "it happens in nature" argument proves anything on it's own. The simple fact that homosexuality occurs in humans is enough to prove it's natural: humans are not above nature. The fact that it happens in nature is irrelevant in any context other than to prove that homosexuality is not unique to humans.

With that in mind, there are still plenty of logical and scientific arguments for why there is nothing inherently wrong with homosexuality. Even if it didn't happen in nature and was only something that occurred in humans, why would that in itself make it immoral? I haven't yet seen an argument against homosexuality capable of standing up to logical or scientific criticism.

Yeah it is OK to run around mauling people however the police wouldn't like you very much.

but what the hey world is over populated any ways some one has to do there civic duty

Mauling harms people. Being gay does not. Also, where do you think your store bought meat comes from? Animals die for that.

Mauling people harms them, obviously. Just being gay doesn't harm anyone.