1) I did not read the first guys comment if you are referring to a comment thread if you are referring to the person who made this debate I completely agree.

2) Okay that is a good point that I did not think about before submitting my comment. Some things, mental things, occur in many species and the usage of the word all was an exaggeration.

3) I very much agree with you on that part.

4) I was referring to both the author and previous commentator.

Okay I feel like I must clarify my previous statement. I read in a comment about how humans could take on all the animals on earth I was providing a hypothetical situation to combat that statement. Right are not something you would typically find in nature, at least not to the human scale, but even if a species doesn't have the current ability to understand the concept of rights, something even some humans struggle with, that does not mean they shouldn't have them. Think of an infant or young child, they typically don't understand the idea of rights until they are explained, does that mean thy should not have rights such as right to food, right to safety, or the right to continue living? No. I know physical power isn't the only power in the world but it is a strong one, police are sometimes required to use physical force to restrain a person or group. I am trying to pose a theoretical situation that both should and should not be taken literally.

Religion doesn't happen in nature so it is unnatural

Driving doesn't happen in nature it is unnatural

You argument is like these just placed here to gain a reaction from readers only I think I'm calmer than you and thinking about this more rationally.

I don't think they are the arrogant ones if this is a statement all people who share your belief state. If it happens in nature it's natural that's how things work, just because someone has different preferences in their life doesn't make it wrong. It's like saying I like dogs so since you don't like dogs you are unnatural. Stupid and not affecting me. Until you give me a serious reason to have such a negative opinion towards homosexuals I will have to say that it isn't affecting me in my life and I see no way it is affecting yours.

I feel like you may just want an argument but he was just making a point about how idiotic the question was. If something is natural why don't all species have it. Some animal species have homosexuals not just humans. It would be appreciated if people did some research to topics before posting things like this.

1) What if she's a lesbian?

2) Three way relationships

3) What are women's rights, feminazi?

The bible says nothing about about lesbians being wrong just that a man can't lie with another man the way he lie with a woman.

I am agnostic, I don't believe one way or another. If asked I would awnser, possibly. Without evidence for or aginst I don't wish to make an uninformed judgment. And it really has no current affect on my personal decisions so Manet later in my life I will research a bit more and make a choice one way or the other but really the belief in a deity should have no effect on a person's life choices. If you need to consult someone else about making a decision it may not be the best choice to do it.

I am not opposing you but an athiest doesn't believe in a got at all hence the name a, meaning not or without, and theist, which if I am remembering correctly is the belief in a deity. Christians are theists who believe in the existence of a deity. You can't be both.

You know what else animals can do? Fight. Even if humans created moral rights humans have the free will to make their own decisions, like for instance not hurting or killing animals. If a person couldn't do anything that a farm animal could would it be right to slaughter and eat them?