Essay 1 A Natural Law theorist would argue that homosexuality is unnatural because it goes against four common definitions of the word unnatural. The Natural Law theorist would argue that homosexuality goes against the descriptive laws of nature, it is artificially produced by humans, anything uncommon is unnatural, and that any use of an organ that it contrary to its purposed use is unnatural. Leiser believes that these contentions to homosexuality being a natural phenomenon do not sufficiently explain why homosexuality is unnatural. Leiser believes that homosexuality does not go against the descriptive laws of nature because these laws are meant to describe behavior, not prescribe it. (Leiser p. 56) Leiser gives the example of the law of nature that says that water boils at 212 degree Fahrenheit. This law does not tell the water that this is what it has to do, but simply describes a natural phenomenon. In fact, if any of these descriptive laws is broken, then it cannot be considered a law at all. (Leiser p. 56) With regards to the contention that homosexuality is unnatural because it is artificially produced by humans, Leiser refers to his typewriter. He explains that man had to remove certain substances from nature and put them together using a variety of chemical and mechanical processes to create his typewriter. With this, he argues that the logic that would lead someone to believe that this is a reason for thinking that homosexuality is unnatural would lead someone to think that anytime man exerts a degree of control over nature, it is unnatural. (Leiser p. 57) In defense of the argument that homosexuality is unnatural because anything that is uncommon is unnatural, Leiser argues that there are plenty of behaviors that are uncommon that are not considered unnatural. He illustrates that not many people play the viola in a string quartet, and that great poets, musicians, and scientists are uncommon, yet they are not considered unnatural. (Leiser p. 58) To counter the claims that any use of human organs that is contrary to their principal purpose or function is unnatural, Leiser uses a hammer as an example. He explains that a hammer’s primary purpose is to pound nails, but it can also serve the function of cracking nuts. (Leiser p. 59) For every object, there does not have to be only one natural and proper use. Also, Leiser points out that the use of one’s sex organs can produce intense pleasure, and this use does not have to be directed towards procreation. The needs of organs can vary as per the needs and desires of the owner. To say that every organ has one principle and natural use is arbitrary. I believe Leiser’s strongest objection to that Natural Law Theorist is that homosexuality does not go against the descriptive laws of nature. I believe that this is his strongest argument, because it is the most apparent. Leiser is absolutely correct that the descriptive laws of nature are there to describe natural phenomena, not to prescribe them. Also, if these laws are broken, then they are not laws. Homosexuality can happen, and does happen. Therefore, there can be no natural law that says that homosexuality is unnatural. In my opinion, this argument is very convincing because I do not believe that there is a way to logically deny its truthfulness. To justify this argument, one must answer only one simply question: does homosexuality exist? I do not believe anyone can logically deny that homosexuality exists, meaning that no one can logically deny that homosexuality goes against the descriptive laws of nature.