Replies

Homosexuality does not occur in nature.

So homosexuals only exist on some supernatural paralell plane of existence?

Homosexuality is more than the bare act of sodomy:

I'm aware of that.

what is it we are constantly told--it's a "lifestyle"?

Who constantly tells you this? I've asked before what defines the "homosexual lifestyle" from those who assert that it is a lifestyle, and I've never really gotten a good answer.

So drawing a parallel between it and, say, a male wolf mounting another male wolf, is a total perversion of the term.

What about pair-bonded female seagulls? Or pair-bonded male penguins?

Homosexuality is a pair-bond relationship between two men or women that includes sexual intercourse.

No, homosexuality is the characteristic of exclusive sexual attraction toward persons of the same gender.

Basically, it is supposedly everything that marriage is, just with same-sex partners.

No, "pair-bonding" is another matter. There are homosexuals who never enter a relationship, instead seeking out sex from casual acquintences. To be fair, though, there are heterosexuals who behave in an equally stupid fashion. There are also homosexuals who never enter a sexual relationship of any kind whatsoever, just as there are celibate-for-life heterosexuals. I'm sure that some of them are even celibate by choice.

So if you want to find a true animal equivalent of human homosexuality you have to find me a MATING pair-bond relationship between two male or two female animals. Where two male wolves, foxes, birds, or anything else, go off and live alone together AND mate while doing so. This occurs precisely nowhere in the animal kingdom that I know of.

Lesbian seagulls and gay penguins. Those are just two stark examples that come to mind. If you need more, I can probably dig up more extensive references.

What about pair-bonded female seagulls? Or pair-bonded male penguins?

Very well then. Point me to one study that shows homosexuality occurs in nature. My undergrad training is in ecology, so I won't be afraid to dive into any peer-reviewed journal articles. So don't be shy.

You guys are BOTH off on the definition of "natural." Natural means "of or according to nature"--not in the sense of Mother nature but in the sense of "what is proper or essential to a certain thing" (Latin natura). It is in the nature of water to float when it freezes. It is in the nature of man to breathe air. It is in the nature of protons to repel each other.

Let's get Darwinist for a moment shall we? The reproductive system evolved for reproduction. Period. The materialist who holds to Darwinism has to believe that everything that evolved evolved because natural selection selected for it. Now I want you guys to give me a scientific model as to how exactly homosexuality got "selected" into human evolution.