Richard Neuhaus of First Things quotes Adam Kirsch reviewing a book by Jean Bethke Elshtain:
"Our sense of the natural is constantly evolving - slavery and patriarchy once seemed natural, while in some quarters gay marriage is still stigmatized as unnatural."
Mr. Kirsch evidently disapproves of viewing gay marriage as "unnatural" which raises the question in what sense gay marriage might be thought to be "natural". If by "natural" we mean what is biologically normal, there's certainly no warrant for saying that gay marriage is natural. Homosexuality occurs in nature, but it's not normal either statistically or in any other sense. If by "natural" we mean something like "designed for connubial or conjugal union", then the fact that men are manifestly not designed by nature for sexual congress with each other would seem to render this meaning implausible.
If gay marriage is considered to be unnatural maybe that's because it is; In every sense of the word.
RLC
