It is invalid.
That is not the argument.
The argument was that homosexuality was against nature.
It has been in fact proven to be natural.
What's natural for one species isn't natural for all species.
This is true.
However, homosexuality is natural as it's in nature.
You can deny it and try to pretend that it doesn't exist.
The fact of the matter is that it does exist whether you agree with it or not.

fine , so its against HUMAN nature,,,,


and whoever posted 'anus' is a made up word,,,,,,,,needs to also be corrected about the English language and biology ....

It's not against human nature.
There are gay humans.
Nice try though.

there is a difference between a 'gay' person and 'homosexual' behavior

'homosexual' behavior exists in allegedly heterosexual people and in allegedly bisexual people

the 'nice try' is by people who try to confuse the issues of
emotion and behavior

and identity and behavior

,,there isn't proof of 'gay' animals,, although there is evidence of homosexual behavior in animals

,,,,the 'born that way' myth is not proven by the animal kingdom

what the animal kingdom proves is that animals instinct is to survive at an cost

we know Jeffrey dahmer committed cannibalism, and most sane people don't think that was natural

although, in the animal kingdom where the only consciousness is survival, animals do indeed eat other animals of their species


people have pedophilia relations too, but no sane person would say it is 'natural' because there are species who have sex with their children

,,there is a difference between BEHAVIORS in animals (and the reasonas) and NATURAL behavior in humans

,,,but , hey, if the standard for 'natural' is lowered to just anything seen in the world (in nature),,, than I guess just about anything people want to do is natural,,,,,

You would be correct if you said it went against human reproductive nature but it does not go against human nature.
A human can be attracted to and have the same emotions for someone of the same sex.
Just like someone can be attracted to and have the same emotions to someone of the opposite sex.

true

and Im not talking about emotions, IM talking about how those emotions are interpreted and manifest,,,,

Gay and "homosexual behavior" as you call it often go hand in hand.
There's a reason for that.
As homosexuality is natural.
Just as heterosexuality is natural.
Nice try once again but you have failed.

I haven't failed at anything

I stated truth




there are very few examples in even animal nature of EXCLUSIVELY homosexual behaving animals,,,,

MOST of the examples we have of homosexual behavior is in animals who ALSO have relations with the same sex,,,,


people can define 'natural' however they wish,,,,


I have never heard people justify murder by saying its 'natural' because animals kill each other

so I will continue to find that response in the debate on homosexual behavior in HUMANS to be insane,,,

Your truth is a lie.
Also.
Cannibalism and murder aren't the same as engaging in homosexual behavior with a member of the same sex.
Your arguments shall remain invalid.

continuing to repeat the word 'invalid' isn't an argument or a response


homosexual behavior in HUMANS is also not the same as homosexual behavior in ANIMALS

,,exact sameness isn't required

but, how we judge ACTIONS, is a valid argument regardless of the ACTION

so, if an ACTION, is justified somehow by it being 'NATURAL' somewhere ,, that is an INSANE justification imho

It is an argument and a response when the opposing argument is invalid.
How some humans perceive homosexual behavior doesn't all of a sudden make it unnatural.
It is natural. Whether you agree with it or not.
It's there. In nature. It's not going away.
You mention insane.
I'm a Lunar.

yes, I understand, it depends upon how one defines 'natural'

by definition ANYTHING I decide to do,, will then by default be 'natural',, as it will then be 'found in nature'

I don't consider 'natural' to be that broad of an area,,,,,

I don't care what we are talking about beyond that it is an ACTION

and an ACTION isn't justified as 'natural' to humans merely because it can be 'found in nature'....

it was a supreme court issue because the loudest majority fought for it and successfully linked It to a very vague idea of 'pursuit of happiness'....

I do.
Nature is everything.
Not everything is natural however like Mountain Dew.
You have to make it yourself but it's worth it and it's delicious.
Sexual preference and the activities that go along with it is natural.

lol

mountain dew is a product, not an activity

many products are not natural by the fact they are man made


but by this, every behavior is a 'natural' one,,,and its your prerogative if you choose that broad definition,,,

lol, not quite

its the pursuit of LEGAL ACCEPTANCE,, that's nothing to do with happiness

they already have the 'happiness' by having their relationship hopefully

getting the government stamp is about ACCEPTANCE< not happiness...

and I don't change meanings, yet I understand that in human language our words can have SEVERAL different meanings which are applicable based upon context

and in context of HUMAN Behavior, I don't think 'natural' means anything that any species does,,,

Mountain Dew is to an activity.
You just have to get hyperjacked by drinking it.
The fun ensues from there.

and what would make me 'happy' is a 20 dollar job,, should government mandate I am provided that as well?

'pursuit of happiness' is the most vague explanation for any law,,,

yes, I clearly have a problem of feeling that sexual relations involving one sex organ and one non sex organ are not EQUAL

to the NATURAL sexual relations which involve both parties SEXUAL ORGANS


,,yes, that's my problem

and my problem is what will now become pushing this idea on our children and their children,, that its all EQUAL

when its so obviously NOT The same, or equal and a husband and wife are not EQUAL to a husband and husband and wife and wife

,,,,and I probably wont get past my problem any sooner than others will get over their problem of believing the government is mandated to provide whatever will make them 'happy'


or who need the governments label in order to be 'happy' in their personal relationships ,