<snip>
>>
>>Please define 'natural'. And, if possible, please try to keep religious beliefs and ideologies out of it.
>
>here we go again:
>
>10 men in a desert land.. 100 years after.. 10 skeletons..
>
>5 men, 5 women in a desert land.. 100 years after.. A population..
>
>here is what we call the natural..


This is truly an invalid argument that you keep trotting out. This is the form your argument takes:

1) Create a contrived but "acceptable" scenario - an island with only men and another island with men and women.

2) State that the island community with men only will not be able to procreate. The statement is logically correct and hence no counter argument.

3) State that the island community with men and women will be able to procreate (assuming the desire and fertility to do so). The statement is logically correct and hence no counter argument.

So far we have (1) contrived scenario, (2) logically correct statement, (3) logically correct statement. And then because 2=.T. and 3=.T. you somehow magically deduce that that hence God is against homosexuality and therefore it is unnatural, Q.E.D. Wow. Why not rather deduce that God is simply against 10 heterosexual men being on a island and leave homosexuality out of the argument entirely.

The only thing your scenario "proves" is that men, regardless of sexual orientation, cannot procreate by themselves. Nothing else.