Is being gay going against natural laws?

I just had a thought, similar to the film Daybreakers, what if everyone on the planet was gay? and nobody had sex with the opposite gender.

Humanity would end! Isn’t that sort of going against nature and our basic animal instincts?

I’m not anti-gay or anything like that. This isn’t a troll thread. Just a simple question.

Nature’s laws are over rated. Rape and murder are great ideas by nature’s laws.

And I really wish people would let go of this strange idea that gay people can’t have children. Gay people frequently have children!

There is a theory that gay people make better aunts/uncles and that that partly explains why the trait is passed on.

If your criterion is whether more reproduction versus less reproduction would improve things for humanity, wouldn’t heterosexuality be the bigger problem?

I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and try to give you a real answer. First, being gay isn’t against nature because it is generally created by nature. To the best of our scientific understanding, being gay is a developmental trait that occurs when the sexual part of the brain develops as the opposite sex. That doesn’t just apply in humans. There are human models for homosexual behavior in lots of species including rats, monkeys, apes and others. Some of these can be produced on demand in the lab by altering the sex hormone patterns during certain critical periods in early brain development and has been for decades.

Second, being gay doesn’t preclude having children and never has for either males or females. Plenty of gay people get married, have kids, and then announce their real preferences later. They have the equipment to do it and often the will as well. That does bring up the question of what real homosexuality is however. There are certainly people who have homosexual tendencies who have only had sexual relations with the opposite sex and heterosexuals that have had homosexual type experiences. It is a hard thing to measure because behavior doesn’t always match the preference.

If it is against nature, it’s merely one of millions of other things humans do that are against nature, for example, manufacturing plastics, cooking our food, treating our diseases with medicines, farming, etc.

Yeah, but every single person cooking food isn’t going to end humanity.

Neither is treating diseases with medicine, manufacturing plastics (to a certain degree it could)

So what? Going by the numbers, the “natural” thing for a species to do is to go extinct.

And if I might add, if every person on the planet did non-agricultural work, we’d go extinct much faster than if we just didn’t reproduce. This is no basis for an argument that plumbers are morally inferior to farmers.

You are forcing a question that isn’t relevant. Not everyone is going to stop having children even if every single person on earth suddenly becomes gay. The negative correlation between being gay and having kids is far from perfect. Lots of gay people want kids and have always found ways to have them even if it means faking things for a while.

You are also making a sudden jump from some people being gay to everyone on earth being gay and that isn’t warranted. Being gay is one of thousands of possible oddities that a person can exhibit almost at random. Being left-handed is not normal by any means in the true sense of the word. It would not be good if everyone woke up left-handed tomorrow either but we are pretty sure that isn’t going to happen. If it did, people are still pretty good at adjusting. We could re-engineer everything to work for a world of left-handed people. Likewise, there would be new babies in an all gay world. It could be done the old fashioned way or through technology. The desire to propagate the species isn’t perfectly perfectly linked. with who you want to take the first dance with on Saturday night.

What if everyone on the planet were male? Humanity would end. Does that mean that maleness is unnatural?

Well, no, obviously it’s females who are unnatural. Everybody knows that :smiley:

Why would it be a bad thing for the human race to go quietly and peacefully extinct?

Oh, I forgot to add, regarding the OP:

  1. There is no “natural law” in the sense that the OP title uses it.
  2. Since we are part of nature, we are incapable of going against it. And if we weren’t part of nature, you could make the obvious argument that it would be “better for nature” if we ceased to exist.
  3. Gay people, as far as I understand it, are generally acting in accordance with, not against, their “basic animal instinct” regarding sexual preference.

Since what constitutes a “natural law” is not a factual question, this is better suited to Great Debates than GQ.

General Questions Moderator

Let’s say that homosexuality WAS against natural law. Would that be a bad thing?
After all, just because something’s “natural” doesn’t mean it’s good. Snake venom and poison ivy are natural.
(Note – I am NOT equating homosexuals to snakes and poison ivy! Just pointing out that "natural doesn’t make something good or bad)

Laws are a human construct. You could make the case that all laws are against nature, that is, what we would naturally do.

We apply the term ‘law’ to a natural phenomenon to give people a sense of how consistent that phenomenon is, not because it’s something we should obey.

Is a plane against the ‘law’ of gravity? No, gravity is a part of what makes a plane work.

You know what? I don’t want to have sex with other guys. Even though it’s been legal for years now; and even though I could move to several different states of the Union or a number of foreign countries and have gay sex within the bounds of [del]holy[/del] civil wedlock. There’s nothing wrong with gay sex, it just totally doesn’t interest me. I mean, I like guys OK–some of my best friends are male–but I just don’t like them that way. It’s not them, it’s me. But we can still be friends!

I’m pretty sure there’s something in excess of 3 billion other guys out there who feel the same way. (Many of them, in fact, are much more vehement about the whole “no thanks to gay sex” than I am.) And of course there are at least 3 billion women who are largely interested in sex with men (although all of the really hot ones are at least bi-curious, if the Internet is to be believed).

So, this whole “Oh no, the human race will die out in an enormous gay orgy!” thing strikes me as a non-starter. I really think it would strike any actual heterosexual the same way. It’s like saying “What if everyone converted to Roman Catholicism and they all wanted to be priests and nuns, and nobody ever had sex again?!?” “What if every single person on Earth refused to eat anything but Brussels sprouts?!? We’d all get some weird deficiency disease–beriberi or something like that–plus, the price of Brussels sprouts would totally go through the roof!”

I think the only people who would really worry about the whole “the world ends in a gay orgy” scenario would be people who are, not to put too fine a point on it, gay. (And probably the ones who are in the closet and denying their sexuality, since those closeted people are more likely to be thinking “Gee, I guess everyone else must be fighting these constant urges, too, right?”)

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. (The being gay part; the still being in the closet part is, I think, rather unfortunate in 2011.)

Is being a flight attendant going against natural laws?

I just had a thought. What if everyone on the planet were flight attendants? And nobody did other work like farming, or engineering?

Humanity would end! Isn’t that going against nature?

I don’t have anything against flight attendants. I just wanted to point out that flight attendants = unnatural abominations.

I used to think that was an absurd argument until about two years ago when I thought I had heard everything at that point. That was after another round of anti-gay politicians and ministers getting exposed for gay sexual activity. That theme seems to repeat itself over time. I read something that made perfect sense. Most of them don’t want to lie or deceive anyone. They honestly thought think that gay temptation is a sin like any other and has to be actively fought against or others will fall for it as well like drugs or criminal activity.

What they don’t realize is that most people don’t have those tendencies and don’t have to fight them at all. It simply never enters my mind as straight person for example. I tend to like gay people just fine but if the whole world turned gay, I would happily just sit off to the side and not participate because I don’t have the capacity to do it. It simply isn’t there so I never feel threatened by gay people. I like their music and style but another man is about as useful sexually and romantically to me as a Golden Retriever but probably much less because I like patting dogs and playing with them.

Humans are so sexual and horny a certain percentage of them will have sex with animals. What makes you think humans, even if all gay, wouldn’t get horny and screw the other sex once in awhile anyway?