"harmful abuse of sexual design"<quoted text>
Most people understand that by nature, they refer to evolution and design. Evolutionary mating behavior condemns homosexuality as a failure of the primary goal of evolution. Design condemns homosexuality as a purposeless duplication and worse, a harmful abuse of sexual design.
For such a pseudo-intellectual self-proclaimed expert on "evolution and design," who believes that concepts, such as 'evolutionary mating behavior and design' are capable of condemning ANYTHING, you sure have a grossly narrow and limited understanding of... well... everything. But it is a common mistake to try to define homosexuality as a behavior, and to make all sorts of assumptions about what that behavior is, and what it's purpose is, or if it has a purpose.
How much of your own behavior is a "failure of the primary goal of evolution" as you would define it?
It is amusing to see people try to disguise their prejudice as some sort of infallible scientific formula. Sorry Ki, it's nonsense. It is not surprising to see how arrogance and ignorance walk hand in hand.