Homosexuality Is (Not)Against The Nature

An argument that is often used when agitating against Homosexuality that is `against nature`. This argument is often stressed when it is suggested to gays to deny their nature. The easiest way to undo this argument naturally is through biological, zoological, and social facts. There are several investigations regarding Homosexuality in the realm of animals (same-sex sexual activity has been found in more 450 nonhuman, one of the famous example is gay penguin couples at New York City's Central Park's Zoo, Squawk and Milou. These male penguins, entwine their necks, kiss and have sex—and they firmly reject females. Another male pair in this zoo, Silo and Roy, seemed so desperate to incubate an egg together that they put rock in their nest and sat on it. Their human keeper was so touched that he put a fertile egg to hatch. Silo and Roy sat on it for the necessary 34 days and finally, Tango, was born, and they raised Tango beautifully)and these show, on a purely scientific level, that Homosexuality among animals seems to be something that takes place quite regularly, and it also can be noted that animals do not seem to know this specifically Human Behavior of stigmatizing this variation. In this context people might ask oneself why nature hasn’t abolished Homosexuality a long time ago if it really finds it that wrong. With all this clues and scientific findings nothing remains from this `against nature` argument. We also can reverse this nature-thing from another point of view. If one rejects something or turns something down because it is “against nature”, we can implied in this rejection the idea that nature is better than human and that the ways of nature are always right and that nature should more or less function as an example for us. If human does everything in the way nature shows, he will find the way back to the roots and will become inconspicuous part of the great whole.