If homosexuality were preventable should it be prevented?

[ideologue08]

Since when does 'natural' mean 'without risks'? If we have asses into which cocks can be inserted with only small risk of anything harmful resulting, then we have an activity nature has provided us the means to enjoy. Let us ignore several important points, such as the fact that only a minority of gay men have anal sex on a regular basis, or that gay women exist and this argument does not apply to any but a tiny percentage of them.

There are countless other activities which carry risks and cause damage to bodies not 'designed' to handle them optimally and are not 'natural' if that is your definition of 'natural', and I'm sure you both engage in some of them. Here's just a short list:

- Smoking tobacco
- Drinking alcohol
- Typing on a keyboard
- C-section birthing
- Walking upright
- Driving automobiles
- Drinking cow's milk
- Consume processed foods
- Ride on commercial aircraft
- Consume caffeine
- Undergo surgery
- Ride in rollercoasters
- Receive x rays
- Play tennis

I could go on, and I wonder how many of those who participate in these activities should be prevented from existing. I have no doubt the Bible will provide reasons to kill any of these people.

Stop trying to rationalize your superstitious hatred scientifically. It's repulsive.

What's repulsive is the damage done to the anus through repeated penetration and the out of control HIV rates amongst gay men.