Conservapedia and gays

Conservatives often use the word "pervert" to refer to homosexuals. Strangely enough, their own obsession with the sex lives of complete strangers is apparently not perverse in the least. This is shown in the article on Homosexuality on Conservapedia, stating false things such as Lesbians are more likely to become obese, or that Gays and Lesbians are also more likely to smoke than heterosexuals (though this is somewhat true, but it's only due to the fact they are under a lot of stress and pressure because of the homophobic assholes). It is most likely they came to this conclusion from calling Homosexuals fags all the time. This can cause a problem for the Englishman in the US, as in Britain, a fag is a cigarette. Saying that you're looking to pick up "a pack of fags and a rubber" (that is, "cigarettes and an eraser") can lead to either a vicious beating or a rollicking good time. It can also lead to lung cancer. Conservapedia also refers to homosexuality in animals as a "myth". It's not a myth though, is it? It's true. While animal and human sexual habits don't entirely correlate, homosexual behaviour (that is, choosing a partner of the same sex even when one of the opposite sex is available) has been observed in around fifteen hundred species and in a third of those, it's commonplace. Here are 2 Gay Penguins who want to be Daddies. According to the Conservapedians, even if homosexuality is natural, it's not necessarily moral. This doesn't make any sense either, as if God DID make us, then surely the natural way he made some people was gay, therefore making homosexuality natural and moral anyway. There, I just poked a massive, homosexual hole in your logic Conservapedia. I look forward to your apology to the worldwide gay community any day now.