besides the fact these arent comprabable to homsexuality, and in fact, very offensive to many people, im sure, defining cancer and mental illnesses are "natural" or "unnatural" is fairly arbitrary and kinda irrelevant.
The fact that homosexuality was declassified as a mental disorder apprx 34 years ago, but still debated is highly relevant to our discussion. Now, you read what I quoted, read my question and put on your thinking cap, and you'll see why defining them as natural or unnatural is relevant.
They're hard to cure, hard to define, hard to diagnose, hard to treat.
The same can be said for homosexuality.
They don't come from ingesting bad food or having sex.
Actually, BOTH can come from ingesting bad food or having sex. Syphilis can lead to mental illness, and nitrosamines and acrylamide are said to cause cancer (these are found in foods.) In addition, I suggest you look into the link between HPV and cervical cancer, and after you do, come back and tell us what you find.
They are biologically inherent in the human gene pool, and they EXIST.
See above.
so we cant just wish it away. if it were "unnatural" odds are that it would be filtered out, since humans should need to live with natural diseases.
This doesn't make much sense at all. What are the odds of cancer or mental illnesses being filtered out? If these conditions are natural, why is cancer usually linked to mutations and a result of dangerous habits (throat cancer or lung cancer caused by smoking), and why is mental illness linked to non natural means such as drug use during pregnancy or recreational drug use as a teen or adult? In addition, if cancer were natural, (as you imply) why is it that scientist say a 50% increase in global cancer by 2020? If this were natural you would not see an increase or decrease (the numbers would stay roughly the same), but if you did it, would be based on population or something similar.
In addition, if these things are natural, why is it that industrialized nations have more cancer deaths than non-industrialized nations?
These are still going to exist until we can find a prevention.
Finding a prevention does not mean they are natural.
Regardless of whether or not homosexuality is a disease, natural, whatever, why dont people accept that some men just want to be with men, and not women?
Why can't some people look both ways before they cross the street? Why am I constantly telling people on this board to READ what has been posted before they actually reply? Who knows?!?! The point is, you can accept it all you want, but this is an issue that is going to be addressed and it needs to be addressed.
Regardless of how we're going to define homosexuality, there will still be homos. what the fuck is the big deal?
Do you want an answer?