Homosexuality is natural

I. Homosexuality is a genderI didn't drop this. Please don't say that, as I had three paragraphs on it. Your point is fallacious and nonsensical. Homosexuality isn't a gender. I don't even see how gender correlates with two men or two woman fvcking. What does gender have to do with the resolution in the slightest?Audience, gender doesn't have to do with the resolution. I don't understand my opponents argument. "Homosexuaity is not natural because the word gender is not natural". LOL, WTF!!!! I don't get his weird and nonsense arguments. Homosexuality is intercourse preference to another person of your sex. Gender has nothing to do with it.II. Sex is naturalHomosexuality is attraction to a man or woman of the same sex. Gender has nothing to do with this debate. Your own arguments that "sex" is natural are broken. I don't get his broken arguments on subjective gender. .Him saying that I dropped his points is false. His points are whacky and silly. III. Homosexuality is naturalAnimals are beside the point. We are having a metaphysics disscussion. In metaphysical dialogue, philosophers would attempt to prove an argument by showing how things look at their base. I have more than proven this point. If society, government, and community didn't exist, would homosexuality still exist? That's the question philosophers would ask.If we were to take away society, would people still commit homoexual acts? The answer is yes, because homosexuality is motivated by sexual attraction in the brain. Not society. My opponent needs to refute this claim. Is homosexuality motivated by culture? I reason no, and quite well. Additionally, I brought up some scientific points last round. I wish to expand on them here with sources. Hopefully these sources will prove that sexual attraction is a natural occurence from brain and chemical composition.http://www.huffingtonpost.com...http://edition.cnn.com...http://scitechdaily.com...http://io9.com...http://thoughtcatalog.com...Sexual attraction is determined by who we are. Such as our brain waves, emotions, and personality. My opponent hasn't refuted this.IV. Animals and homosexuality Here are some more articles for my opponent to read. They all confirm the same things. Hell, sex is done completely through males with seahorses. I don't trust his NAARTH site as it was obviously conservative biased when I read it.http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...http://listverse.com...http://news.nationalgeographic.com...http://www.nytimes.com...Here is a photo of two homosexual animals having sex. If that's not evidence enough for my opponent, I have provided a couple videos. Can my opponent still refute homosexuality wouldn't exist without societal constructs?http://www.youtube.com...http://www.youtube.com...V. Desire vs Need My opponent is correct here, but it actually doesn't matter. In nature, if two animals have a desire, in this case, to relieve pent up sexual tension, they will. Just as in life. If we have a need, we will fill it. If we have a desire, we'll try our best to fullfill it. People will desire these things whether or not society exists anyways.http://www.iep.utm.edu...VI. Questions1) Your argument doesn't make sense though. In this instance, you have a slight expectation to prove that homosexuality is created by society and not genuine sexual attraction. You haven't done that.2) That's beside the point even if I hadn't. I have shown several articles on how sexual attraction is determined by mentality. Here are several more indepth studies in case my opponent wasn't satisfied.http://thewholebrainpath.com...http://www.advocate.com...http://www.samesexattraction.org...http://www.livescience.com...Sexual attraction is determined by Seratonin levels and how they mix with our personality.3)That doesn't make sense. Can it not be a natural desire?My opponent is right, I do have the BOP, but that doesn't put him off the hook. He still has some responcibilities in proving homosexuality is actually created by society. This is known in debating as having an "Absence of Evidence". Or I made a claim that is definite unless proven false, so the "Absence of Evidence" really gives the opposition the BOP if you want to get technical.