A different take on the homosexuality nature VS nurture debate?

I agree with a lot of these guys - it's just part of nature and there's a huge amount of medical knowledge in regards to the variations within sexuality, all of them very natural.

A study was done on elephants in the last few years and it was found that the herds with more gay members were more successful because there was always a higher ratio of adults to infants and therefore the care and protection of the infants was better - so it is not an anomaly, it is actually a biological advantage within communities and should be viewed as such.

I could go into the exposure of foetuses to various hormone levels in vitro (in the womb), but that would take ages and I don't know if it would be pearls before swine :P

Scientists were pondering a similar question for a very long time: "What makes us fall asleep?"

Then it became clear: sleep is the natural state of all animals, the default mode, so to speak. They should have been asking: "What makes animals wake up?"

I am convinced that the natural state of all male animals is homosexual, which is why, apart from man, animals need the smell of oestrogen to become sexually aroused, without it they are not aroused by the female, and even then many of them in every species are not aroused by the oestrogen of the female "in heat", as scientists have discovered.

Man requires something else to arouse him sexually, and this really could be something he experiences as a suckling. I once heard a man say: "I could never be gay. I like t!t too much."

For a baby, life's chief pleasure can be nothing more than the process of feeding off the mother.

In two cases out of six, other experiences may vie for the child's attention - hence the statistics exemplified in the Kinsey scale (find it in Wikipedia).

Regarding twins, perhaps we should look more closely at Havelock Ellis' findings that at least one twin is ALWAYS homosexual, and sometimes both are.

There is a lot of scientific work still to be done here. Clearly, homosexuality is not linked to femininity, though some poor little queans have been brainwashed into thinking that they are half woman.

Plato was of the opposite opinion.

Plato's "Symposium"

What would be the point in the debate, seriously if people can not give valid reasons opposing homosexuality the debating it is like a debate on if Blue is the "best"color.

a scientific and philosophical debate needs at least two sides, what on earth would they be?

Knowing the origin of all forms of sexuality would tell us a lot about ourselves and how our bodies and minds work together. I see it as an interesting area, but not one that is vital for people. It wouldn't change that we are who we are.

It could, however, help shut up the naysayers and those who want to suppress others based on their sexuality.

You do know the from studies from science that other animals show signs of homosexuality as well,right? So seeing it as a not so normal part of science seems to sound insulting, no? I say it's completely natural, just that humans like making it sound like it's not, just cause they aren't use to it,it's a foreign topic to them.

Humans are how they are.