What if no major religon (chirstianty etc) had any issue with homosexualty

This supposes that there's some sort of inherent biological, and not cultural, reason for opposition to homosexuality.

I'd be curious to hear evidence of it.

Buddhism has a weird attitude towards it; European observer s in the 16th century commented that Buddhist monks seemed so enlightened and wise... until they began making love to their pupils.

I suppose there's an instinctual fear of what is different or unknown, which can be overcome. If that's biological then I guess I'll agree that people can be biologically opposed to homosexuality. But that makes it sound like people can't overcome the fear, or that it is somehow justified, which is very dangerous ground.
(and no, this isn't 'evidence,' just my opinion.)
 
Does it?

Lust outside of marriage is wrong (arguably within, but you get the idea). Sex for anything but propagation is wrong. Ergo, while homosexuality is natural, acting on its impulses is still sinful.

That is the Catholic position, and IMO the most rational you can arrive at from that particular set of premises. Unfortunately, it is not the only one. Very few Christian fundamentalists of any stripe are ready to accept that for a man to have sex with another man is no worse a sin than for him to have sex with a woman he is not married to.

It gets even worse when you jettison the idea that sex is only acceptable for procreation. Many Protestant groups say that within marriage, all sexual practice is fair game. Think that through and you have to come out in favour of gay marriage...
 
In early labor-intensive agrarian civilizations, there was a near-universal premium placed on procreation (usually of males) to provide an expanding workforce. Families needed to be large, and larger social units needed more people. Public woriks need people. Armies need people. Slave societies need people. It seems to me that social patterns would favor heterosexual marriage among the majority of people to provide increasing population sizes. The aristocracy might find away around this, but there would tend to be discrimination against commoners who did not play this game.

The Judeo-Christian (and Islamic) prejudices against homosexualty reflect the societies in which these religions formed, not the other way around.
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
And that's precisely why, in many of these regions, up until the present date, men could get away with shtupping other men, provided that they were discreet and did their conjugal duties as well.
 
Top