[Zinkovich]

"Artificial" concepts rely on natural/biological precedents almost always. In this sense, nurturing is always in some way influenced by nature.

For example, I could argue that one of the reasons the dichotomy between homosexual and heterosexual relationships exist is most likely due to the cultural/biological(?) precedent of monogamous relationships that either evolved into or was invented and later integrated into the mindsets of man. If polygamous relationships were the norm, not only would many of the "issues" with homosexual relationships go away, but so we any child-rearing issues as, believe it or not, without the precedent of monogamous families it is possible for children to be comfortable with two male parents, or even a shifting number of numerous "parents" sharing the load of raising a child(not that that is a common condition for a child to homosexual parents, however- just as an aside).

Unfortunately, our psychological makeup that has come from a result of our integrating the certain aforementioned precedents allows for some rather unpleasant relations between those that seem to have integrated them into their minds a bit less than others and those who have been completely entrenched in reinforcement of these precedents growing up.

So, what am I getting at? The entire above debate I used as an example is natural. It happens as a result of natural aspects of the human mind and human psychology- natural dichotomies of "for" and "against" that is in and of itself part of the progressive adaptation from one generation to the next. Time will tell which attitude is beneficial, by deeming which attitude prevails and survives in our relatively newly formed artificial setting(which, I argue, is a natural paradigm that could still be deemed "natural" as biology is still the core of the entire functioning of it). Nature does not speak, it results in certain conditions and attitudes- these conditions and attitudes in and of themselves will be natural regardless of the moral nature of it's many aspect in the minds of certain individuals or groups.

I also argue that the only reason the word natural originally needed to made as a dichotimism was due to the formation of metaphysical concepts and to further establish the seperation of causes and realms(you know- "supernatural" versus just "below" i.e. "natural") within primitive societies everyday language and viewpoints.

Edit: I know this seems a little bit deviated from the original thrust of the topic, but I felt this viewpoint needed to be brought to the forefront, here.