We should throw out this appeal to what's "natural" vs "unnatural". Anything we don't like or is counter-conservative is "unnatural". It's so vague and absolutely meaningless. For is not everything we do according to our human nature? So how can it be unnatural? And even if it's been touched by man, what's wrong about it being "unnatural" if we accept that label? The language serves no purpose but to appeal to an ideal that doesn't really exist, or exists selectively depending on the argument. I would much rather us be clearer about exactly why "unnatural" is bad so as to promote understanding instead of labelling.