I know that there are heaps of answers to this and I’m simply going to be repeating what most of them have said but it’s important that everyone see how resounding this is:
Whether or not homosexuality is ‘natural’ or not DOES NOT matter.
We tend to use many things that are not natural – the net isn’t natural so our terrible communication right now isn’t natural. Does that build the web good or unhealthy? No.
Some things that are unnatural are dangerous, like bombs. Of course, some natural things are dangerous – infanticide. Are these items good or bad as a result of they are natural or for other reasons?
If you are still interested in whether homosexuality is natural well then that depends on what definition of natural your using. Some folks suppose everything is natural (as we have a tendency to are just an evolution of nature).
If we need to talk regarding natural in the context of ‘existing outside of human influence’ then sure. Homosexual behavior has been noted in lots of non-human species.
Some have had life-long partners, others only fleeting. Some same-sex partners have raised young even. But, it’s vital to recollect that we cannot category their sexual orientation per simply their sexual behaviors.
Another method of taking the term natural is to look at pure biological theory (evolution in explicit). In this regards, yes homosexuality is once more natural.
There have been lots of proposed theories to clarify homosexuality in an evolutionary context. The key part of this though is remembering that homosexuality is alive and homosexual behavior and tendencies have survived for much of human history.
Clearly, evolution is not obtaining rid of it, or at least not efficiently. Some state the thought that homosexuality may not be biological but psychological.
However then if you would like to make that claim then you have got to seek out some means to argue against the official positions of all major psych organizations and the mountains of research they’re based on.
On top of that, you’d also need to argue against the proof of epigenetic/chromosomal correlation and in utero connections with homosexuality.
AND THEN STILL you’d need to argue that somehow psychology falls outside the realm of ‘natural’ as we tend to have seen many animals bear psychological stages (grief, unhappiness, affection, excitement, etc.).
In short: Yes, it’s natural. But who cares?
Sexuality isn’t binary. Human sexuality exists on a continuum of each potential factor that one can establish in the realm of sexual attraction.
Even each of these things is not binary, nor do they exist on a gradient scale from 0 – ten (0: totally straight; 10: totally gay) as a result of that scale creates a false dilemma (one comes at the expense of the other).
Every factor, itself, exists on 2 scales: homosexual and heterosexual. Each scale exists on the gradient of 0 – ten (zero: no attraction; 10: total attraction).
For every factor (kissing, dating, touching, cooking dinner along, obtaining oral sex, giving oral sex, fisting, fingering, S&M, bondage… no matter), there will continually be two totally different grades: 0-10 in homosexual activity and 0-10 in heterosexual activity (and doubtless a lot of since gender isn’t totally black and white; though sex principally is).
One may be 10|10 in kissing and a 9|3 cooking along and 2|1 in getting oral sex and 3|10 in giving oral sex and on and on an on.