>>>>>It is not subjective at all. Unnatural as in against nature. For Darwinians, evolution and natural selection would eventually weed out homosexuality (or at least keep it marginalized) since reproduction is not possible unless you believe a few million years of homsexuality would eventually evolve the particular species into asexual beings. For Creationists, it is a moral issue.
>>>>
>>>>Chicken or the egg? For creationists it was the chicken. For Darwinians, it was the egg. Me? I don't care. I'll eat both!
>>>
>>>The egg? I thought it was a bunch of random cells that bumped together in some bog to create a blob that eventually sprouted remedial appendages that allowed it to emerge from the water where only a few million years later it had evolved into the divergent species of the mighty T-Rex and awesome Triceratops among other truly fascinating creatures. Why can't someone invent a time machine already!?!?!? Can't this be done know with Sedna?
>>
>>Blob that sprouted appendages? Yummy! ;)
>
>Yep, I had proof of their very existence quite often in my refrigerator before I got married.

Usually in the salad "crisper", right?