Hi experimenter!
Don't be sorry for your opinions... Lord knows I've heard worse. *It's too bad you skipped some of the posts. *I think I did cover the whole "against nature" argument already. *Ah, here it is:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by [b
Quote[/b] ]The only post I'll respond to has to do with homosexuality being "unnatural". *Unnatural means "against nature" or "not found in nature". *Terminal Velocity, if you would care to check your facts, you will find that homosexuality happens quite frequently in nature. *Among animals that bond for life, such as swans and wolves, there have been recorded homosexual pairings. *The most wide-spread case would be the Bonobo chimps-who actually engage in sexual relations with members of the same sex.
Are there alot of these cases? No. *Because, as you said, if everyone became homosexual the species would die out. *But since it occurs in nature, homosexuality must serve some function. *Perhaps as population control. *Perhaps as relatives who have extra resources in bad times because they don't have the drain of children. *
|
So same sex pairing occur in nature. *How can that be "unnatural"??
As for gay people adopting or creating a child... well, the instincts to nuture the young are still there. *If people weren't so closeminded maybe "gay adoption" might help to relieve some of the problem of unwanted children. *And maybe not so many gay people would choose to conceive. I mean, that's the only way now to be able to say "This child is MINE." *In most states adoption isn't a choice.
Thanks for your response. *Feel free to respond again.
