How many here....................

[poddster]

...................think that homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation?

[azureline**]

---

@poddster wrote:

Az you are cherry picking now

The debate is about homosexuality and if it is natural or not

---

No cherry picking, Icy introduced that.

It is natural. I don't need to argue it, ask your homosexual friends.

[*pepe]

---

@poddster wrote:

But lets get back on topic ok?

There have been a number of contributors to this thread who have said that homosexuality is a natural state, but none have provided any argument supporting their claim, all the y have said is it exists and they are in favour of it or that they they don't if it is natural or not.

Would one of those who believe it is natural please put an argument to support their claim that it is a natural state.

---

prove that it isn't natural.

[bluecat*dancing]

I believe that a person's sexuality is determined by genetic and hormonal factors.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@lionrose.7 wrote:

Ele I know heaps of parent both with brown eyes that have a blue eyed baby.

Depends which gene both parent throw, the brown gene will always over come the blue gene Unless both parent throw the blue eyed gene. then the baby will have blue eyes

---

I stand corrected - my only excuse is it's almost 60 years since I was taught Mendel's Law in my school biology class.

. After consulting  Professor Google I think this is probably the best explanation: 

The gene for brown eyes is a dominant gene, meaning that when paired with any recessive gene, such as blue eyes, the brown eyes will be the phenotype of the child (phenotype being the outward appearance in eye color) but the genotype would be big B for brown eyes and little b for blue eyes. Bb would be the pairing. If you and your partner both have the Bb genotype there is a 25% chance you baby will have blue eyes because the two little b's can pair together and create a blue eyed baby.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@bluecat*dancing wrote:

Hetero is the norm and is as natural as homosexuality.

---

No. Hetero is the norm and is natural. Homosexuality may be preferable to some, but it is not natural.

---

So if you believe it is not natural, then  you must  believe it is produced artificially.

Natural: existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=natural%20meaning

Natural: existing in or formed by nature (opposed to artificial)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/natural

[joz*garage]

i heard we are all born bisexual, and can go either way

im more interesting in tinkering in the gaarge to go searching for evidence though

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@poddster wrote:

But lets get back on topic ok?

There have been a number of contributors to this thread who have said that homosexuality is a natural state, but none have provided any argument supporting their claim, all the y have said is it exists and they are in favour of it or that they they don't if it is natural or not.

Would one of those who believe it is natural please put an argument to support their claim that it is a natural state.

---

Poddy, I have posted two very similar dictionary definitions of "Natural" If you accept them as correct, then obviously homosexuality is natural, i.e. it is produced by nature and occurs in many different sepcies.

If you are using a personal definition of natural which deviates from the dictionary definition, then you need to explain to us exactly what your definition is so we can understand the grounds on which you are claiming it is not natural.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

So if you believe it is not natural, then  you must  believe it is produced artificially.

Natural: existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.

---

I know, I know I said I wouldn't comment ...

[*pepe]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

So if you believe it is not natural, then  you must  believe it is produced artificially.

Natural: existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.

---

I know, I know I said I wouldn't comment ...

---

you also said i twisted your words - that statement was false too.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@*pepe wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

So if you believe it is not natural, then  you must  believe it is produced artificially.

Natural: existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.

---

I know, I know I said I wouldn't comment ...

---

you also said i twisted your words - that statement was false too.

---

Oh, you are horrible! ..................... But, I like you.