Let me, a scientist (who works in a lab and wears a lab coat and experiements with chemicals and lifeforms and everything) throw my words into the fray here.
Darwin, in his opus "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" never did speculate that the sole purpose for any individual is procreation. Rather, he postulated that those RACES whose practices, habits, instincts, and physical conformation are best suited to the environment they live in are most likely to survive, and therefor most likely to procreate, thus perpetuating their genes. Species that work together to rear offspring are more likely to successfuly rear offspring than those who exert no effort to rear their offspring. He did not state, nor did he imply that it is in any way unnatural for any individual to not procreate. He did state, though i can't at the moment find the direct quote, that the most natural thing an individual can do is strive to survive.
Now, Incocknito, the dictionary i have at hand (the New Oxford American Dictionary, second edition, 2005) defines Natural as thus:
"existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind"
I would like for you to please explain to me how that in any way equates to organisms having to procreate in order to be considered natural. I'm a simple person, so simple, easy to understand, well dillineated explanations work best, please. If needed, the definition of Nature is thus:
"the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations"
Mind you, being a scientist, I find this definition to be narrow minded and earth centric - and I'll be writing a letter to the editors of this particular dictionary to have them change the word "earth" to "universe," but that's a different argument.
Dolfette, I like your hypothesis. It is well-formed and based on solid observations. I suspect the question of homosexuality is more complex than the answer you've given, but it's a good stab!
.
