It's tacky to try to describe things in weird terms to make them sound bad instead of arguing their merirs. I'd rather "breasfeet at a random animal" than "eat genetically engineered things that grow in dirt and manure, covered in bugs".
Yes, but not the one you mean.
Cow milk: can consume it straight as it is produced by nature, right out of the cow (but chilled is probably tastier). Can consume milks from lots of other animals, too. The only reason adult animals don't frequently consume milk is probably just availability. https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/64822/are-humans... has interesting info, including adult wild birds finding they could peck through aluminum lids to get milk and wild gulls consuming seal milk.
Soy milk: consuming a liquid produced by soaking, cooking, blending, and straining a plant part that is unsafe for humans to eat until processed by heat or fermentation. https://healthyeatinghttps://healthyeating.sfgate.com/happen... Then if you're buying it from a market, it has probably been packaged into a plastic or plastic-lined container (like commercial cow's milk) and processed to be shelf-stable for months, all to provide a close similarity to that "weird" drinking milk as an adult.
"Natural", although often overloaded and used politically, can't quite stretch that far.
But why are you blending and steeping and straining the coconut/almond material instead of just eating it? Oh yeah, because you want it to be like what you'd get from "breastfeeding from a random animal" as an adult.
Lactose intolerance is about as relevant as nut allergies, except it's unlikely to kill you.
But in drinking "not animal milk" you're trying to artificially approximate the experience of drinking "animal milk", which you described as unnatural.
Note that I'm not one to say that "unnatural == bad". I think cooking is good. I think dairy is good. I think consuming something nutritious in its natural state is more natural than cooking something.
You're free to differ.