Being gay is a fetish.

[Esquilax]

I'm not getting hung up on semantics. I'm sticking to my original purposes. You like to shift arguments to new ground. For instance, you've said that factors during childhood might influence eventual sexuality, and that hose factors may not be conscious choices of the individual. But, as I'm arguing that people are not born gay, as people are born black, those factors, even if true, are irrelevant to me. Factors during childhood don't make people black.

So you basically just don't want to address what the point of the argument actually is, which is that immorality cannot be applied to things people have no choice in, and instead you want to argue the semantics... while denying that you're arguing the semantics.

Exactly. 

So you're asserting that we should trust those with no idea of what the experience of gay people is like, over people that have some idea? That seems cogent to you?

LOL - unambiguously stating that the cause is ambiguous.

Laugh all you want, the APA's own resources, linked from their website, specifically state that there is no scientific consensus on this issue.

I have the actual science

Let's see it.

This'll do ya.  Notice how absolutely none of the studies done make the blithe "it's a choice" derpery that you did in your initial argument from ignorance. There isn't a consensus on the issue, but nobody even sees your conclusion as a legitimate area of study.

Which is subject to confirmation bias.

So we should believe you, with zero information as to their experiences, over them, because... you say so?

which I think is more of a direct hint than the interpretation of a study that doesn't say what you think it says, to reach a conclusion you'd reached before looking at the study. And if your only response to those testimonies is "oh, they're lying," well, I don't have to furnish a response to "nuh uh!" now do I?

Speaking of arguments from ignorance, here you go again.

How is this an argument from ignorance? I give an example, you dismiss it out of hand... how is my noting that you've given no reason for your dismissal other than an assertion that you cannot possibly know about not sufficient rebuttal?

My point is this: you do not have anywhere near a consensus of mainstream science as to the causes of homosexuality,

Neither do you.

Yep. The difference is that I'm actually living the life of an LGBTQ person, and so have sufficient evidence to refute your argument from ignorance right off the bat. Oh, and I'm not sitting here asserting that what I'm saying is the default and you have to prove me wrong, either. I'm just saying that when there isn't a consensus, there isn't a consensus, but I trust the contents of my own mind over whether this is a choice more than your fiat assertion and a study that, at best, merely rules out an exclusively genetic origin. Your only response to that is to tell me I'm lying, but you don't know me, you can't read my mind, and so that response is simply one of ignorance made to retain the conclusion you'd already come to before I'd even started speaking.

I don't sit here and just invalidate everything you say through fiat dismissal, because I can see that that doesn't get us anywhere. Is it too much to ask that you do the same?

Not nearly as much as you. I have twin studies and cross-cultural studies. All you have is the personal feelings of people with a personal interest in the outcome.

Was the conclusion of either of those sets of studies that homosexuality is a choice? No? Gee, then I guess you're stuck with an argument from ignorance, propped up by attempts to poke holes in the opposite conclusion rather than supporting your own, which is itself an argument from ignorance.

You mean like believing that practicing homosexuality isn't a choice?

Where the fuck did I state that I believed practicing homosexuality wasn't a choice? You wanna strawman me any harder, Chad?

My entire position is based around whether being homosexual is a choice, you're not gonna be able to sit there and crow using little word games to try and misrepresent my position.

An here I was thinking that people could choose with whom they did and didn't have sex . Silly me.

Considering that that isn't the issue at all, you are indeed being very silly. But then, dodging the issue via obtuseness and fiat assertion is kinda standard operating procedure for you, so I'm not exactly surprised either.