OK so @Drich and @Klorophyll are on the same page, which is genetics don't play any part in homosexuality. I could cite the articles listed, or legitimate scientific studies, if they haven't already. I feel it's a fairly logical and supported position, but let's forgo that for now. Let's say genetics only play a part in whether you have a peepee or a vag (ignoring the neither or both scenario). I'll make it real simple.
1. Genetics determine your equipment
2. Your equipment is part of your sexual identity
3. Your sexual identity is part of your sexual orientation
Ergo: genetics does at least play some part in your sexual orientation.
If we can't even get past the premise, it's not even a chance we could get to the oughts and morality of it.
1. Genetics determine your equipment
2. Your equipment is part of your sexual identity
3. Your sexual identity is part of your sexual orientation
Ergo: genetics does at least play some part in your sexual orientation.
If we can't even get past the premise, it's not even a chance we could get to the oughts and morality of it.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari