Homosexuality is not natural

You are right to point out there is no direct link to Bonobos as our ancestors, I was really just generalizing the point that we were not so long ago living a similar existence to those not so distant cousins. -Ok. It didn't sound like you were generalizing. It sounded like a matter of fact. This I think is not insulting at all, it is the subversion of the truth that is insulting. " 'Given the fact that the homosexual population in the world is notably lower' " "That is really not surprising, given the hostility and bias people who come out can face. It also ignores all of the Bi and transsexual populous. When included it is more like 25.6 million Americans (11%). "approximately 3.8% of American adults identify themselves either as lesbian or gay" (1) Culture plays a large part in gay & bisexual people denying their true feelings, this undoubtedly effects counts, alongside only counting completely gay people. Completely gay people should be a small minority if a spectrum exists. (4)"Ward eventually concluded that most of these men were identified as straight because heterosexuality is their culture, as well as a marker of being "really normal", despite any same-sex practices." To add, if bonobos had an oppressive belief system that encouraged them to discriminate in return for a reward after death, it may cause a similar situation to us. Fortunately for them they have not evolved speech yet to conceptualise this." - Yeah, I didn't include every category of the gay / lesbian community. Nor did I take emotions into factor for the accurate portrayal of numbers. Ok. Even so, if we had all the data at our fingertips, do you think that the percentage population of all gay, trans, lesbian, or bisexuals would far bypass that of the heterosexual population? I don't think so, and if you don't, I don't understand the overall point your trying to make. - I'm not even going to answer every individual statement you've made in your final argument, because you set up to explain how homosexual is natural based upon genetic diversity, and yet you're utilizing a belief system to substantiate it: Macro Evolution. Not everyone believes in the type of Evolution you're inferring to make your point. That's like me saying that homosexuality is not natural because the Bible and God says so - How far am I going to get if I start like that? If you don't believe in God or the Bible, obviously not very far. Well, if you are not a proponent of the idea that we evolved or are even remotely related to monkeys, you're not going to get far with convincing the other side of the aisle,either. - I would offer this: If Evolution were true, survival of the fittest is accurate, and your portrayal of the Bonobos monkeys bisexual behavior substantiates a genetic link to the behaviors of gays, lesbians, transgender, and bisexuals in our societies - as being beneficial because of group cohesion, then that would substantiate your claim for "natural". However, data shows that behaviors within that community leads to self destruction, not survival of the fittest, hence not natural. - For instance the concentration of some of the world's most deadliest sexually transmitted diseases run rampant in a gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual community. That is a product of "survival of the fittest" and "natural"? - Perhaps the United States and other countries do not allow people in that community (more specifically openly professed homosexuals) donate blood for that reason? http://aids.gov... http://www.nbcnews.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... https://www.goodreads.com... - Examples of how people consider macro evolution to be a belief that's true or false - Hence disagreement - Ergo, not a good premise to make an argument. https://www.goodreads.com... - Examples of how people consider creationism to be a belief or true or false - Hence disagreement - Ergo, not a good premise to make an argument. Thanks for the exchange of words.