Search the Community

I have been in conversation with a lesbian on a facebook thread, and I thought the discussion there was worth expanding here (particularly in light of such related threads as Thoughts on the Gay Scene in Beauty and the Beast ). At issue is whether homosexuality is normal, natural, healthy, and moral. To set the stage for the discussion, I posed the same question in the title of this thread: If homosexuality is normal, natural, healthy, and moral, then why are there so relative few homosexuals in the general population? The basis for this question was a report, which we both accepted as credible and correct, from the Williams Institute (a LGBT Think Tank) indicating that Homosexuals make up less than 2% of the U.S. population. Given this statistic, it was obvious that, by definition, homosexuality couldn't rightly be considered as normal (usual, typical), particularly in comparison to heterosexuality, which represents 96.5% of the population. It was further agreed that lack of normalcy and small percentages isn't necessarily indicative of abnormality (undesirable, worrisome, unhealthy, etc.). After all, geniuses represent only about 1% of the population, and while it isn't normal, it is far from undesirable. Whereas, people with IQs less than 70 represent about 2% of the population, and is rightly considered abnormal. Other abnormalities include sickle cell anemia (less than 1% of the population), Aneuploidym, Down Syndrome, Developmental delay, and various behaviors (see HERE) At issue, then, is whether homosexuality is desirably not normal or abnormal. I believe the answer rest in the answer to the question of this thread. I contend that there are relatively few homosexuals because homosexual behavior is unnatural, unhealthy, and immoral. In other words, there are so few homosexuals because homosexuality is abnormal. I plan to provide evidence and reason for each of these contention. What do you think? Thanks, -Wade Englund-