I wasn't making any argument. I was asking why it matters what the root of gayness is, and I still want to know. I think it's an absolutely stupid argument because it doesn't change a single thing, only reaffirms each side's position.
Then you can attribute the stupidity to the people using the root of their gayness as to why the rest of society should accept a lifestyle revolving around something they don't engage in with 99.9% of the population. They're the ones claiming it.
Second, when you start using the 'nature' argument for anything and demanding it be accepted on those grounds, you start down a slippery slope. We're all complete humans, capable of good, bad and in between and it can come naturally to a person to do something awful. If it didn't come naturally, they probably wouldn't do it.
So, if the homos are going to scream about nature, and what comes natural to them and demand it be acceptable on those grounds, the question arises and it matters. Does anyone with a rational mind simply accept a proposition without questioning it? If it's going to be raised, to such a public and social level then yes it certainly does matter.
As for what people do in their own bedroom, it would be nothing more than that if there wasn't a segment of the population who thinks that what other people do in their own bedroom automatically makes them pieces of shit who aren't worth of equality. Deny any demographic privileges that others are provided and the issue will be thrust into the public forum. The fact that some people disagree with it doesn't give them a right to treat people like second class citizens.
You got it backwards. If it were something they simply did in the sack, you'd not have a lifestyle revolving around it, parades, press conferences and a general self-induced demographic segregation created for it. How you can claim otherwise I don't know. The people I work with don't relate to me based on how I interact my wife. My family doesn't interact with me on a sexual basis, so generally there is no lifestyle around my sexual preference. And let's not pretend this is some natural consequence that everyone should have simply had a eureka moment over and accepted without pause. What precedent is there to recognize a segment of society based on how they interact sexually? Can anyone get on board the human rights train and start demanding to be recognized for limited personal qualities? Short people, fat people, skinny people and on and on. It's a joke for a deluded generation that's enslaved to it's own genitals and can't find any value in itself beyond sexual relevance. Progressive.
He also said not to mindfuck your neighbors wife but he also apparently built that into what comes "naturally" to humans.
You may not believe in God, and I'm not one to belittle you for such a thing, but if you're on the fence you might want to be careful. Jesus said the only unpardonable sin is blasphemy of God's spirit, which is attributing evil to God and vice versa, for example, blaming Him for man's assholish behavior. While you'll be hard pressed to find many openly attributing the good things to Him in recent times, there's no shortage of people wanting to sihft their responsibility to one they claim doesn't even exist. This is what Jesus warned against. You don't have to believe me, but I do have to be honest and tell you.