I talked to some people about gay marriage and heres how it went:

Girl: Happy Pride! if you can’t support equal rights for all, then YOU’RE the gay one.

Me: Equal rights for what? Once homosexual marriage is allowed, other unnatural sexual acts must also be allowed. When do we draw the line? Once you allow gay marriage you must also allow marriage of family members. Are you saying the unnatural marriage of mother and son is perfectly fine?

Girl: There is already a woman legally married to a national monument so I think lines have already been crossed. I would love to know how gay marriage would affect your life

Me: It effects my life by forcing me to engage, and live in a society which encourages, and promotes unnatural behavior; behavior that is against natural law.

Other guy: Define “natural law”

Me: People have a basic, ethical intuition that certain behaviors are wrong because they are unnatural. We perceive intuitively that the natural sex partner of a human is another human, not an animal.

The same reasoning applies to the case of homosexual behavior. The natural sex partner for a man is a woman, and the natural sex partner for a woman is a man. Thus, people have the corresponding intuition concerning homosexuality that they do about bestiality—that it is wrong because it is unnatural.

Natural law reasoning is the basis for almost all standard moral intuitions. For example, it is the dignity and value that each human being naturally possesses that makes the needless destruction of human life or infliction of physical and emotional pain immoral. This gives rise to a host of specific moral principles, such as the unacceptability of murder, kidnapping, mutilation, physical and emotional abuse, and so forth.

Girl: And who decided that a man should be with a woman and a woman with a man?

Me: It is self evident, but open any biology book for evidence. The natural sex partner for a man is a woman, vice versa. In order to reproduce, a human must have sex with the opposite sex; obviously. Animals are usually mobile and seek out a partner of the opposite sex for mating. Look up internal fertilization for more info.

Right, thankfully you don’t know anyone intelligent enough to actually refute what you say.

Girl: What does reproduction have to do with love? What’s so wrong with a gay couple who want to adopt one of the countless children that straight people give up everyday?

Other guy: FYI: countless cases of animals with intimate “gay” interactions.

Google for more info

Me: The bottom line is that homosexuality is unnatural. As I’ve said, allowing homosexual relationships is then promoting, and encouraging other types of unnatural relationships like incest. Just because two people love each other doesn’t mean they should automatically be allowed to marry one another.

Should a gay father and son, who are a “couple,” who “love one another,” be allowed to marry each other? Can’t they adopt a child? Why not? They love each other, right? Because it’s unnatural and goes against the nature of human sexuality the same way homosexuality does. Don’t you see anything obviously wrong with this scenario?

Me: Right Other guy, except there is no evidence that its genetic. No study proves homosexuals are actually born that way. Show me a study proving there is a gay gene. Sexuality is psychological, it’s a part of personality. Personality is developed, which includes sexuality.

Girl: All you’re doing is stating your opinion over and over and bringing up incest which is irrelevant and in no way connected to homosexuality. You’re entitled to your opinion, good luck going through life with such a closed outlook. :slight_smile:

Me: My opinion is based upon fact. If homosexuality is natural, is healthy and good, and thats the truth; then I’m all for it. Unfortunately that isn’t the truth. Evidence is the truth, along with reasoning

  1. The natural sex partner for a woman is a man, vice versa. That’s a fact.
  2. Homosexuality is unnatural relative to 1.
  3. No one is born gay.
  4. Based on 3, homosexuality is wrong.

With this understanding, homosexuality is an unnatural behavior. Incest is also an unnatural behavior, it is a type of unnatural behavior. Both homosexuality, and incest are unnatural behaviors. If you had read anything I said, you would see how incest is very related to homosexuality.

Once homosexuality is an acceptable behavior, then incest MUST also be an acceptable behavior, since they are both unnatural behaviors. Once you allow ONE type of unnatural behavior, you must then allow all other types.

A gay couple who are father and son is obviously unnatural. It is an incest, and homosexual relationship. There is nothing healthy, or good, or right about that kind of relationship.

lol, I’m the one with a “closed outlook” on life. I’ve actually presented reasonable arguments, and I’m the “ignorant one.” My outlook is the truth. If you can prove to me homosexuality is based upon truth, then I’ll support it. You have failed to do that.

Girl: Why are you putting “ignorant one” in quotes when I never said that? Do you understand what quotes mean? Show me a study that proves people aren’t born gay.
What about a mother and son who have an incest relationship? Uh oh, now incest is factually linked to heterosexuality. Guess you’re bound to eventually be in a sexual relationship with a family member based upon the fact that you’re heterosexual.

Girl 2: Lolcats @ OP. What a comedian.

Other guy: Yeah man, your logic is very misconstrued, and frankly quite laughable. You should re-read that a few times maybe lol. She didn’t call you ignorant, but I will.

Girl 3: I can’t believe you would suggest homosexuality is on the same level as bestiality. Here is an example- Ron and Don are a gay couple. Both men are over 18 and both have legal standing to sign a marriage liscense. Ron owns a dog named fido. Although Ron has a legal standing to sign a marriage liscense, his dog fido dose not have legal standing and cannot sign a marriage liscense. Also, did you choose to be straight? If you state that one’s sexual identity is a choice then you have also admitted to heterosexuality being a choice. Case closed.

Girl 3: Also, if you have taken a college level english composition class, you might have also realized that your last comment contains a slippery slope fallacy. That argument that “if we legalize gay marriage then we will be opening the door to marriages between humans and animals or toasters” is frankly a weak argument that is getting old. I also hope you realize that in our lifetime gay marriage will be legalized nationwide

Girl 4: Homosexuality can be linked to the promotion of the species; by having satisfying sexual relationships with others of the same sex then the body doesn’t go through the stress of reproducing, allowing humans to expend their energy in economically useful ways instead of reproduction. If they do decide to have children later, via adoption etc, they will be able to provide for the children much better. In addition, heterosexual siblings can benefit from the success. I’m not saying that all gay people are successful, but it is a possible ‘reason’ not that I think it needs to be defended. If you have known anyone who has gone through the pain of realizing that they are gay, you know it isn’t a choice; most want to be a normal person; grow up to have a lovely wedding, be husband and wife. They don’t want to be confronted by people that call them unnatural. They just want to ‘normal’. And they are.

What do you think of what I had to say? What are your responses to what these people have said so far?

interesting read!

These people won’t listen to reason as your arguments have already proven. Stop talking to them and pray for them. Most people who are like this only support homosexuality because they themselves are gay, they have friends or family who is gay, or they are a bleeding heart type that jumps on every social bandwagon that everyone else is jumping on (homosexuality is a right, abortion is a womans choice, etc)

Keep upi the good work.

I have had similar dialogues with me making the case that using nature as an example to show that homosexuality is neither natural nor normal. Of the few examples found in nature, we see they are exampes that were temporary and the animals were in “extreme” situations.

here are some of my thoughts put together.

A silly response to this is that putting pants on is not natural either. It just shows they enjoy smoke screens to distract from the facts and if they stayed on topic they would have to agree with my statements.

History = out of the billions of heterosexual marriages throughout history, there may be about 50 same sex marriages (0.0000000005% of all marriages) which faded into obscurity indicating two things, 1, it never caught on, 2, it was accepted by all to be mock marriages just like when Caligula mocked the senate by electing his horse to the senate.

History (pt2) = the was a time when black people couldn’t marry white people. The fundamental factor in marriage is the complimentarity of the sexes which is upheld in this type of claim. Funny that. Oh and by the way, people are born with their skin colour but are not born homosexual.

Did you know the most recent (2012) LARGE parenting study indicates children do best with a mum and dad and they did worst with lesbian parents totally obliterating the sham study of 78 selected lesbian parents (there are no studies of worth of male homosexual parents).

If marriage is something more than a lifelong committed union, what is it that makes it more?

I am so tired of hearing about “homosexuality” in nature. Animals mate based on instinct. And those two males aren’t in love; the one on top is asserting his dominance over the one on the bottom… kind of like in prison. I don’t think all those men in prison are gay, but they do form gangs for protection and the weaker men get picked on.

And I agree, you need to pray for these people.

In order to have meaningful dialogue, you need to a) meet people where they’re at, and b) both parties must be open to listening to what the other has to say. I think in this case, these people are not in a place where they are open to listening to truth. Their minds are made up and they only want to hear from people who agree with them. Or if they can change your mind. But logic is lost on them.

What might work is if you pretend to agree with them at first, and then ask questions that get them to think and slowly but surely take out their arguments.

If you want to refine your argument, maybe you can explore why something unnatural is considered wrong.

Celibacy is unnatural (the human body is mean to reproduce), but we look at that as a sort of higher calling. If the entire human race was homosexual, then we wouldn’t be able to continue our species. But the same can be said about celibacy. What makes one right and one wrong?

Gay marriage may indeed open the flood gates. Before you know it, they will want to legalize interracial marriage. People “perceive intuitively” that interracial marriage is ‘wrong.’ :stuck_out_tongue:

I’m being facetious of course… but why doesn’t your line of argumentation apply to interracial marriage?

That’s an important part. Why is something thats unnatural wrong?

Homosexuals already have equal rights. They have just the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as does anyone else. What homosexual activists are really requesting is special rights.

Dear filter2700,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Homosexual acts of depravity will always be unnatural and wrong, dear friend, because the normal course of nature, heterosexual coitus, is what is natural and normal for our race to perpetuate the species. Thus to depart from this and to engage in homosexual deviancy is against the normal course of nature and hence, by definition, unnatural and wrong. The natural union is between a man and a woman and so homosexual activity, which will not issue in offspring, is clearly wrong and disordered by any reasonable standard.

The very unnaturalness of homosexual aberrant acts of grave depravity, is sufficient to condemn them, dear friend, because they are a violation of the natural order of our race. As with auto-eroticism and birth prevention, homosexual acts are unnatural and wrong because they involve the wasting of the substance (semen) that should be directed towards the creation of a new life.

Moreover, it should never be forgotten that God is the author of the natural moral law and therefore such deviant acts as auto-eroticism, birth-control and homosexual activity are necessarily opposed to that law. In the Book of Genesis we read that Onan was slain by God for wasting his semen on the ground - “And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also” (38: 10). The gravity of the punishment surely evinces most clearly the gravity of Onan’s most detestable act.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,



When they ask for special rights, it sends the message that they are superior to heterosexuals.

In short, the OP had wrecked their arguments like a boss. :thumbsup:


Because they are trying to indoctrinate us that doing something unnatural is actually natural. They want society to accept it as normal. To teach it in our public schools that it is natural and normal thing to do.
I believe in some of their rights to live in sin but not force us to accept it as normal and be seen as a natural thing to do I reject. Even if you were a heterosexual.

Dear ThinkTwice,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Indeed, dear friend, the normalization of homosexual deviancy is the agenda today and as Catholics we cannot and must not relax our efforts in denouncing it in the strongest terms.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,



PS A very warm welcome to the world of CAF, trust that you find your time here spiritually profitable.

The bottom line is that homosexuality is unnatural.

you should look up in the dictionary the meaning of the word natural and nature.

Believing in the invisible mass murderer, terrorist who bombed at least two cities with napalm and the creature responsible for the genocide of the human race is totally unnatural whereas same sex relationships are completely within Nature (which has nothing to do with your “god”) especially among our closest relatives for instance bonobo. And it has nothing to do with proving their hierarchical status.

Show me a study proving there is a gay gene

You are ignorant religious fanatic as all you lot
Sexual orientation is influenced during pregnancy due to the way hormones interact with the fetus.

Your comments on comparing sexual orientation of homo sapiens to bestiality incest etc just show your complete lack of scientific and medical knowledge on the matter and on NAture itself


Did you actually click on the link in post #13???

Please explain what you mean by ‘natural’ in 1.

Dear Biblepoe,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Men, dear friend, have a basic ethical intuition that homosexual aberrant acts are indisputably unnatural, notwithstanding that they may try jolly hard to supress their moral sense so as to justify and normalize their alternative lifestyle. This ethical intuition informs them that such conduct is contrary to nature and that the natural sex partner for a man is a woman and vice versa. Moreover, men have the corresponding intuition with respect to homosexual vice that they do as regards beastality, namely, that it is wrong just because it is unnatural. Both homosexuality and beastality bring about uncleaness because they are a violation of nature; men should, therefore, only have carnal relations with women and human beings with human beings.

The rejection by the Church of homosexual deviant acts, dear friend, is not an arbitrary harsh proscription but, like other moral imperatives, is rooted in the natural law, the design that Almighty God has built into human nature.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,



Good day to you too.

Men, dear friend, have a basic ethical intuition that homosexual aberrant acts are indisputably unnatural, notwithstanding that they may try jolly hard to supress their moral sense so as to justify and normalize their alternative lifestyle. This ethical intuition informs them that such conduct is contrary to nature and that the natural sex partner for a man is a woman and vice versa. Moreover, men have the corresponding intuition with respect to homosexual vice that they do as regards beastality, namely, that it is wrong just because it is unnatural. Both homosexuality and beastality bring about uncleaness because they are a violation of nature; men should, therefore, only have carnal relations with women and human beings with human beings.

My question was to define ‘natural’. Unless I know what you, OP, and others who make this argument mean by ‘natural’, I don’t know what you mean by saying things like, “Both homosexuality and beastality bring about uncleaness because they are a violation of nature,” or that, “Such conduct is contrary to nature.”

If you or someone else could clearly define the word ‘natural’ as it is being used in this thread, that would be a great help.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.