Is homosexuality natural? (read op before you bash)

[Fortschritte]

Does it happen in nature?

Then it's completely natural, the end

I'm ardently Pro-LGBT, and I'm bisexual, but this argument is oversimplified. For instance, does cannibalism happen in nature?

Then, it's completely natural, the end.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

It's evident that they didn't care enough to leave a will.

People might die when they are young and/or all of a sudden.

And why shouldn't it be forfeit to the state?

Because the surviving partner is supposed to have something in such a time of need?

[Imperializt Russia]

In fairness, the original topic has been well and truly settled.

If a person fails to leave a will, that's not "evidently did not want them to inherit". Nor is it suddenly forfeit to the state. And I say that as a massive statist.

It's evident that they didn't care enough to leave a will. And why shouldn't it be forfeit to the state?

Because it should be distributed amongst the survivors equally in absence of a will. This is how the system currently works.
Though admittedly, it is sold off and the proceeds are what are actually distributed IIRC.

If you want it to be forfeit to the state, leave it to the state in your will. Didn't make a will? In absence of your wishes, we'll let your survivors work out what to do with it.

[Zottistan]

It's evident that they didn't care enough to leave a will.

People might die when they are young and/or all of a sudden.

Minors don't have much/anything to leave, and why not prepare and have a will made when you are not in immediate danger?

And why shouldn't it be forfeit to the state?

Because the surviving partner is supposed to have something in such a time of need?

Life assurance policies tend to cover this, but again, there's no reason why their partner wouldn't have left a will.

[Zottistan]

It's evident that they didn't care enough to leave a will. And why shouldn't it be forfeit to the state?

Because it should be distributed amongst the survivors equally in absence of a will. This is how the system currently works.
Though admittedly, it is sold off and the proceeds are what are actually distributed IIRC.

If you want it to be forfeit to the state, leave it to the state in your will. Didn't make a will? In absence of your wishes, we'll let your survivors work out what to do with it.

Since the whole point is a rejection of the current system, saying "the current system says otherwise" doesn't contribute much.

[Indira]

Is it natural? Certainly. So is Sickle Cell Anemia and blue eyes. The real question is, is it harmful? Because I see nothing to say that it is.

[Norstal]

I find it interesting how your OP reaches the complete opposite conclusion of mine, even though we both tackle the same question; https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopi ... 0&t=322537

You need to provide sources for your claims that homosexuality is biologically unnatural.

Homosexuality may help us bond.

I've heard that theory before, however it needs to be clear in defining the difference between homosexuality and sexual activity between 2 of the same sex.

The article talked about the chemicals involved in their sex preferences. So they measured homosexuality openness as homosexual behaviors. I'm not sure how it can be any clearer.

[Imperializt Russia]

Because it should be distributed amongst the survivors equally in absence of a will. This is how the system currently works.
Though admittedly, it is sold off and the proceeds are what are actually distributed IIRC.

If you want it to be forfeit to the state, leave it to the state in your will. Didn't make a will? In absence of your wishes, we'll let your survivors work out what to do with it.

Since the whole point is a rejection of the current system, saying "the current system says otherwise" doesn't contribute much.

My argument being, the current system works decently.

To make that abundantly clear, since you're taking the position that the current system doesn't work, I'm taking the position that it does.

[The Lotophagi]

People will say there are glands in the anus to stimulate, thus being gay must be natural to an extent. The way I like to see it is that it's left over from the X chromosome, it would be intended for a woman ORIGINALLY. Like in a way nipples work, it's just there, left over from when the fetus turned into a boy. So I see homosexuality as not... natural, but not taboo. I see it as a condition that just can't be cured, so we gotta live with it.

If it's a characteristic of female bodies left over during development, then why do women not have a prostate or its' related 'g-spot' ?

[Zottistan]

Since the whole point is a rejection of the current system, saying "the current system says otherwise" doesn't contribute much.

My argument being, the current system works decently.

To make that abundantly clear, since you're taking the position that the current system doesn't work, I'm taking the position that it does.

I'm not taking the position the current system doesn't work, I'm taking the position that it's unnecessary.

[Martean]

Does it happen in nature?

Then it's completely natural, the end

I'm ardently Pro-LGBT, and I'm bisexual, but this argument is oversimplified. For instance, does cannibalism happen in nature?

Then, it's completely natural, the end.

Cannibalism is natural, murder is natural too.

It may not be moral, but it is definetely natural, the problem is, we tend to associate natural with moral, as if all natural things were morally correct, and all 'unnatural' things were morally wrong.

For example, the treatment that cures cancer may not be natural, but it has saved millions of lifes.

[Imperializt Russia]

My argument being, the current system works decently.

To make that abundantly clear, since you're taking the position that the current system doesn't work, I'm taking the position that it does.

I'm not taking the position the current system doesn't work, I'm taking the position that it's unnecessary.

It's not necessary for us to keep so much of our income. We could give it all to the state, and have the state provide us with food, shelter, warmth and transport.

[Shaggtopia]

You want to be eaten because cannibalism is 'natural?' I didn't think so.

Well this is naturally going to get my attention. equating cannibalism to human sexuality is an interesting tactic.

Interesting in that sometimes people equate a particularly tasty meal to an orgasmic experience, so while no, I would not like to be eaten, I would very much enjoy a tasty meal or a consenting sexual encounter, far be it from me do define what is and isn't 'Natural' considering the entire construct itself implies that anything outside of a rigged set of classifiers is 'unnatural'.
Considering cultural differences rooted in the environment within which that people developed what is and isn't natural can be two vastly different concepts.
For example If an as yet undiscovered tribe is located in a particularly hostile environment the culture that would be created by that society would be far less picky about where their meal is coming from, be it grandpa or the Joneses , Likewise in a culture of religious fundamentalism sexual deviancy is hardly to be expected to be tolerated as it would be considered a threat to the propagation of the species and therefore the culture itself.
Does this make Cannibalism or Religious Fundamentalism inherently wrong? No, it makes them concerned for their survival as a species. at the same token it doesn't make Homosexuality or a Vegan Diet wrong either considering the places they are most likely to be adopted by the culture are post-industrial societies who have the options that their ancestors developed over the course of history.

I suppose this is to say that Homosexuality is Natural to a Homosexual while Heterosexuality wouldn't be. A Homosexual can still have intercourse with the opposite sex but it would be like asking a Vegan to adopt a strict Cannibalistic Diet.

[Zottistan]

I'm not taking the position the current system doesn't work, I'm taking the position that it's unnecessary.

It's not necessary for us to keep so much of our income. We could give it all to the state, and have the state provide us with food, shelter, warmth and transport.

There would be huge negative repercussions from that.

[Ashmoria]

I'm not saying that gays shouldn't be able to marry, not at all. I believe it is their civil right to take whoever they love into a compassionate relationship that may lead to marriage if they wish. I believe people should be able to do in the bedroom what they wish as long as it is with two consenting Human Adults.

Moving on. Is it natural though?

1.8 percent of men self-identify as gay and 0.4 percent as bisexual, and 1.5 percent of women self-identify as lesbian and 0.9 percent as bisexual.

So obviously the vast majority of people self identify as being straight. This study is in the United States alone so to suggest the numbers are skewed is really not valid, and for the argument that people don't have the courage to come out isn't either considering the huge amount of traction coming out for the LGBT community there is very little reason to not come out. Everyone around is doing it from pro players, to singers, to celebs gaining traction so these numbers are fairly legitimate.

The common argument is it occurs in nature, but so do a lot of things like bestiality, cannibalism, and so on and there are all shunned and banned in a modern society. If it was perfectly normal and completely natural wouldn't we be seeing a more level statistical analysis here? something like 60% to 40%? So basically my argument is that homosexuality isn't natural simply because it goes against the self preservation of the species, not that it should be shunned or made illegal in any sense.

Furthermore, many scientists do confirm that homosexuality is somewhat of disorder or chemical imbalance.

When I define natural I suggest that it is not intended to happen in the slightest bit, or that it is in conflict with the well being of the race.

Again, not bashing homosexuality, just trying to debate the science that I don't believe is completely in yet and learn something new about the topic I've neglected for awhile.

we cant do things that are unnatural.

and

its irrelevant since there is no way to tell and there is nothing wrong with it.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's not necessary for us to keep so much of our income. We could give it all to the state, and have the state provide us with food, shelter, warmth and transport.

There would be huge negative repercussions from that.

But it brings our lives down to simple necessity. To be honest, it almost sounds nice.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

People might die when they are young and/or all of a sudden.

Minors don't have much/anything to leave, and why not prepare and have a will made when you are not in immediate danger?

Some people didn't even ever have to deal with lawyers.

[Estenia]

Yes, Homosexuality is natural, it's being straight with disorders leading to it. People mostly at their teen ages find out they are gays, before then, they are straight in a sense they do not like guys, but still do some gay stuff, without anyone knowing.

[Zottistan]

There would be huge negative repercussions from that.

But it brings our lives down to simple necessity. To be honest, it almost sounds nice.

But huge negative repercussions.

Minors don't have much/anything to leave, and why not prepare and have a will made when you are not in immediate danger?

Some people didn't even ever have to deal with lawyers.

You mean me? Because I've dealt with one and he was a bumbling idiot.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

You mean me? Because I've dealt with one and he was a bumbling idiot.

I mean that some people reach their 40s without minding legal trouble.

I'm reckless enough that of all of my 5 or more duties as an adult with the law/government I need to bother myself with, only avoiding the military service was accomplished, and that's only because I'd be arrested on the contrary.

[Zottistan]

You mean me? Because I've dealt with one and he was a bumbling idiot.

I mean that some people reach their 40s without minding legal trouble.

I'm reckless enough that of all of my 5 or more duties as an adult with the law/government I need to bother myself with, only avoiding the military service was accomplished, and that's only because I'd be arrested on the contrary.

Is it particularly difficult to take out a will? Especially if you're trying to make sure somebody you care about is looked after if you die?

[Imperializt Russia]

But it brings our lives down to simple necessity. To be honest, it almost sounds nice.

But huge negative repercussions.

I believe the same of the state coming along and telling me "all his base are belong to us".

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Is it particularly difficult to take out a will? Especially if you're trying to make sure somebody you care about is looked after if you die?

I have no idea and I'm a [relatively] very tech-savvy "digital citizen". Most aren't.

[Zottistan]

But huge negative repercussions.

I believe the same of the state coming along and telling me "all his base are belong to us".

The difference being that he prevent that if he's not lazy and/or irresponsible.

[Ifreann]

I'm not Jewish, though.

It makes sense for an Irish to be Jesus though. Their blood would already be alcoholic.

I might have a drink or two this Christmas, yes.

---

Does it happen in nature?

Then it's completely natural, the end

I'm ardently Pro-LGBT, and I'm bisexual, but this argument is oversimplified. For instance, does cannibalism happen in nature?

Then, it's completely natural, the end.

Exactly what is your objection here?