that only says whether gay sex is usefull for procreation - nothing about its morality

I'm having a hard time not resorting to petty argument tactics such as "you are stupid". But let me be clear. You _ARE_ stupid.

Having gotten that out of the way, let's discuss why. First, you think a boy who sees a picture of a "normal" family will be confused that his "mom" has muscles. A 2 year old is well aware of gender differences and perfectly capable of understanding that he has two dads, rather than a mom and a dad.

Secondly, you believe that child will feel hurt and pain at the "cruel truth". What cruel truth is that exactly? That he was adopted by two loving people to be given a better life than he otherwise would have had?

Finally, STD's are contractable by heterosexuals too.

I ask that you stop and think prior to engaging in discussion.

I have one further question for you. If homosexuality goes against nature as you say, then is it a choice people make? And if so, when did you choose to be heterosexual?

Nope, if the homosexual thinks they are being morally wrong by being gay, then I guess to them it's morally wrong, to me my morals say it's not wrong. So. Morals of each person differ. I don't have a choice to change someones morals. They can do what they want

Nope! What's wrong about homosexuality? I think that it is a personal choice.

Marriage is about union of two souls, not two genders. As long as the couples love each other, no matter they are a gay or a lesbian, they do have their rights to get married, no one should have stop them. Although homosexuals can't reproduce, they could adopt those homeless children as their child.

The reason why some people who think that homosexuality is morally wrong is because it is against their religion but do they ever think about others? Must others gonna be same as them. No one has the rights to force others to do things because in this 21st century, everyone do have their freedom!

Homosexuality is a natural phenomenon: people are born and some are gay. Nothing has been "tinkered with". As proof that it's not a "social invention", we can observe other members of the animal kingdom who also have the incidence of homosexuality within their populations. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_birds_displaying_homosexual_behavior

and the links therein.

It can't conceivably be condemned as "unnatural" when it's natural. Add to that the fact that even if it was a social construction, that alone wouldn't make it bad.

If you think it's "moral" to be heterosexual, then yeah.

If your sane, then no. =/

Oil spills occur in nature, therefore they are natural and good. School shootings occur in nature, therefore they are natural and good. Interesting morality you got here.

Oh but, you say. Homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone. Really? why is their life expectancy rate almost half that of heterosexual males? It's certainly not from bigotry and intolerance. It's more like suicide and infectious disease.

So in short the morality you propose is woefully inadequate. I'll stick to basing mine on the immutable character of our creator, not the changing opinions of mere men.

is it ok to

burn witches

stone stubborn children to death

marry women whom you have taken as prisoners of war

allow the townspeople to rape your virgin daughter (if you felt bad for Lott's wife read again)

should people who work on Saturday be killed

slavery

subjugation of women

we have fought very hard to "overcome" the morals of the bible

"homosexual behavior has been observed in close to 1500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, and is well documented for 500 of them" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

"backwards evolution" ?? great example of what people say when their argument has no substance

isn't it just as unnatural for someone who is gay to act straight because of your morals...?

actual people studying the influencing factors - rather than pulling them out of their (naughty place to you)

http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/comingoutadvice/a/Causes.htm

"If somebody is violating you"

clearly you do not understand the question - the "is rape good" might be somewhere else, not here

2 consenting adults can do what they want

re: not natural

is oral sex morally wrong

re: bible morals

is it ok to

burn witches

stone stubborn children to death

marry women whom you have taken as prisoners of war

allow the townspeople to rape your virgin daughter (if you felt bad for Lott's wife read again)

should people who work on Saturday be killed

slavery

subjugation of women

we have fought very hard to "overcome" the morals of the bible

why are gays bad. as far as i can tell it is because either god said so or because people have an underlying fear against them. gays are not hurting anybody by being homosexual, so it doesn't make any sense.

I believe that their's nothing wrong with loving another person, even if it's with the same sex. and for those of you who think otherwise... shame on you!

Certainly not (this would make for an excellent debate in itself).

If morality is not subjective, which I believe it is not, then the question becomes, does God set moral laws because they are what is moral and right, OR are things that are moral right because God says so.

I'm personally of the first opinion, but don't see it necessary to bring God into it at all. Morality does not need God to exist, but with the inclusion, I believe he sets moral laws out because they are right, not the other way around.

This argument is quite simple. Either homosexuality is a choice, or it is something you are born with. Having never made the choice to be heterosexual, I believe it is a natural phenomenon that people are born with. Perhaps it is God's way of limiting population growth. To those that believe it is a choice, did YOU ever choose to be heterosexual?

If it is not a choice, then there is no point arguing the morality of it. Morality involves choices you make. It would be like saying being black is immoral. It's simply idiotic.

Do you believe that morality is open to interpretation? That it is whatever a person deems it to be? Or, rather, is it a set of laws that is predetermined, regardless of how many people actually adhere to it?

Is heterosexuality morally wrong? Seems fair enough of a question for me to ask.

Well, dolphins are sometimes gay. God apparently made everything but humans were apparently the only ones capable of sin due to that whole apple job a&e;pulled. Something like that anyways.

If dolphins can have gay sex without incurring the wrath of god, I'm sure it should be no different for humans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj2-_tFXXT4

People don't choose to be gay! If people are saying its wrong to be born gay, its like saying its wrong to be born a certain race.

Also how is natural birth can possibliy be morally wrong?

You need to add the clause: "as long as it does no forseeable harm to others". Then it's a perfect answer.