I don't get why you get so upset. First of all there is a big difference between ingrained instincts/subconscious processes and conscious processes. Instincts and many subconscious processes are genetically programmed into us, such as sexual orientation (unless you want to argue it's a choice). Conscious processes however are both affected by subconscious processes and nurture. Conscious processes are rarely "natural".Tragedy said:As I said a few pages back -101flyboy said:Given that the "if everyone were gay" theory is a fallacious argument, your entire point becomes more or less void. Homosexuality is rampant in nature, causes no harm in itself, which makes it very much natural.generals3 said:And evolution doesn't say you must do anything, i agree there. However nature dictates that if everyone were gay the species would go extinct and unless you assume that is what nature intended than obviously homosexuality is not a natural (as in "naturally intended") behavior.
And yes, OBVIOUSLY, if EVERYONE was gay and NEVER ONCE had sex with the opposite sex we would go extinct. But that isn't the case and it never will be, it's a stupid argument.We are pretty much going in circles for like 8 pages now and it's starting to get tedious. People are too caught up in the whole evolution and "the goal of life" (philosophers have been discussing this for millennia, but every person against homosexuality has it all figured out) as if they are some omnipotent and conscious deities that DEMAND *something* from everyone and will punish us when we don't conform. That is silly and childish. The matter of fact is that as natural creatures on this earth, everything we CAN DO is natural by way of associative logic and by your definitions "nature" has ALLOWED humans and animals to be homosexual, it doesn't even matter why. It isn't hard to debunk the "unnatural" routine, but it requires more thought than "buuuuut it doesn't make babiiieeezzz waaaah". Neither does oral sex, but you don't whine about that.
But you see here is the difference: oral sex is an unnatural action. Homosexuality is an unnatural "trait".
However as you may notice, since i hold no grudge on oral sex there is no reason to believe that i hold a grudge against homosexuality "because it's unnatural". You just assume that because I think A i also think B. I have actually previously stated that that was not true.
And whether it is the case now is irrelevant to the argument. The argument is there to determine if it could be naturally intended to be "programmed" with a homosexual nature. Do mind that genes undergo many mutations and what not, which can easily make the programming deviate from its initial intentions. And that also goes for other animals.
The only argument that you can now hold against me is that there is no evidence that genes affect sexual orientation. To which i preventively say: due to a lack of studies on the domain one can only speculate on the source however since sexuality seems to be very subconscious it seems plausible it is linked to our genetic coding.