na⋅ture
  /ˈneɪtʃər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ney-cher] Show IPA
Use nature in a Sentence
See web results for nature
See images of nature
–noun
1. the material world, esp. as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities.
2. the natural world as it exists without human beings or civilization.
3. the elements of the natural world, as mountains, trees, animals, or rivers.
4. natural scenery.
5. the universe, with all its phenomena.
6. the sum total of the forces at work throughout the universe.
7. reality, as distinguished from any effect of art: a portrait true to nature.
8. the particular combination of qualities belonging to a person, animal, thing, or class by birth, origin, or constitution; native or inherent character: human nature.
9. the instincts or inherent tendencies directing conduct: a man of good nature.
10. character, kind, or sort: two books of the same nature.
11. characteristic disposition; temperament: a self-willed nature; an evil nature.
12. the original, natural, uncivilized condition of humankind.
13. the biological functions or the urges to satisfy their requirements.
14. a primitive, wild condition; an uncultivated state.
15. a simple, uncluttered mode of life without the conveniences or distractions of civilization: a return to nature.
16. (initial capital letter, italics) a prose work (1836), by Ralph Waldo Emerson, expounding transcendentalism.
17. Theology. the moral state as unaffected by grace.
—Idioms
18. by nature, as a result of inborn or inherent qualities; innately: She is by nature a kindhearted person.
19. in a state of nature,
a. in an uncivilized or uncultured condition.
b. without clothes; nude; naked.
20. of or in the nature of, having the character or qualities of: in the nature of an apology.

the red highlighted definitions are the ones you are incorrectly attributing to your definition. the bolded is the correct definition.

as for homosexuality, you have to determine whether or not that term is actually defining something real or not first. we don't even have a clear definition of what gender is, let alone what it means to be attracted to the same gender. watch the video at this link and all of it's following videos. there are ten parts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWGRi99cVHo

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

if you watched that video you wouldn't be saying that. it goes deeper than that. look up the gender spectrum.

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

...and you also must define homosexuality and gender and find if homosexuality even can exist. watch the damn video lol.

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

also, here is a synopsis of the physical aspect of gender ambiguity. there are also, as the video explains, cultural and psychological aspects (the latter can, in essence, be tied into physical, though it is not outwardly visible) of sexual ambiguity that can blur our lines of gender and make it hard for us to determine whether homosexuality is even possible. the crux of this argument, however, lies in the stages between conception and birth, as the fetus is going through sexual development within the mother. children begin as asexual beings. every one of us does. they have develop extra skin in their frontal pubic region that can develop into either a penis or a clitoris, or possibly even neither (which is quite rare) and can vary is size, a large opening with extra skin that is very sensitive and either forms into the labia or the scrotum sack, etc. we are all, in essence, exactly the same. gender itself is a myth. however, chromosomes determine our genital structure and our behavior which will also lie on the gender spectrum (ranging from femininity to masculinity with infinite variations in between, of course concluding with Chuck Norris the furthest in the direction of "masculinity" of any man ).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/gender/spectrum.html

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

i think "chemical imbalance" is a bit of a presumptuous term though. chemicals can only be imbalanced in comparison to what we see as balanced. what if, by natural selection, it had been decided that our species would be "homosexual" by nature? would heterosexuality not then be caused by an imbalance? homosexuality (which i do not think is a proper term in and of itself. watch the above video i linked and the info i posted for more on that), then, can be defined as a specific organization of chemicals that predisposes the individual to being attracted to forms of their species with genitalia similarly -- almost exactly -- constructed to theirs. by this definition we can, in a sense, define loosely what homosexuality, and therefore, by even looser standards, what heterosexuality is and we can also conclude that it is natural.

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

yes, but until sodr comes to this thread to present his opinion on the subject there is no need to harp on that because we are all in agreement on that, as is bacon. for that reason i found it appropriate to take the discussion further. besides, bacon's initial post alone takes it further.

we had this exact discussion a few weeks ago and this was my exact argument. I_Guy took more of a "spectrum of what is natural" approach, Menace took a "natural is what exists before human intervention" approach with chinita and others agreeing with him, and bacon took more of a "it depends on how you decide to define it" which technically would have been the correct way to look at it, but how he put it made it seem as if you can define a word however you want, which i find to be absurd. it all came down to us coming to different conclusions of the meaning of "natural" because we were all referring to different, equally valid definitions of the same word. my argument was that, in the way it was being used in the initial comment and considering the recent multitude of knowledge/political threads on the subjects of cosmology and philosophy, that this definition of the word "natural" was the relevant one in that particular thread. in this thread, however, my above post has bolded the correct definition of the word in the context it is being used.

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0