Quote:
Originally Posted by lemit
I think the idea that homosexuality is unnatural (which has been forgotten here) has merit, since sex is nature's way of preserving and promulgating the species, and all the actions once referred to variously as sodomy do not further that cause.
|
As someone who is pro gay marriage, I would concede the above point. Though would suggest this doesn't mean it is unnatural. Kissing and hugging would be "not furthering the cause" by the standard above. And arguably artificial insemination would be furthering the cause, though I'm guessing most consider that unnatural.
But stating all that which doesn't further the cause, would only seem to narrow the definition of what is natural. I'm one of those people who thinks if biology is the standard for what is natural, then arguably it is all natural. How could anything man made be considered unnatural? I don't get that logic. Thus homosexuality would indeed be natural, even while it may not further cause of promulgating the species. Most sexual / intimate acts do not further that cause.
Homosexuality is not conducive to pregnancy. I think some can see high benefit in that, among the natural order of things. If everyone were homosexual, then Houston, we would have a problem. But wake me up when we suddenly live in a world where 10% of the population is heterosexual and we are TRULY concerned about that problem.
