Floyd, Your narrow choice of definition buys you little concession here. Ask a crowd to give you their definitions of natural and normal. What you are going to hear are definitions that rarely conform to your rigid, scientific "phenomenon...in nature" and "modal tendencies" definitions. Moreover, the definitions you will hear are also included in everyone's dictionary and stand as common knowledge. Both words mean substantially more to the common man than you allow. The mere fact that I am being admonished to limit my definitions to limited scientific terms is a tacit acknowledgement of the weakness of science to address such issues. Your insistence on using specific terms can only be an angle you are trying to exploit in order to win an argument but it will have a negligible effect on that majority of men that have a natural and normal repulsion to the activities one participates in when one defines himself as a homosexual. Their dictionaries were written for them and you.
To further my point; I have always asserted that God has endowed us with a conscience and a soul. The conscience I speak of is the natural and normal aversion to homosexuality. Science may take note of abnormal animal behavior but it will do little to empirically explain my natural aversion to homosexuality. That will be your job. But do take note that I dissociate you and science if you undertake that task.
Stuart Gort
