Replies

I never claimed that all homosexuality was due to a genetic cause but in the case I described I am certain that it is the cause.

Yet there isn't any evidence to support homosexuality is genetic. It's all been discredited and even homosexual activists have admitted by their own research the major cause behind homosexuality is environment.

I keep this around because I have to repeat it so often:

There have been quite a few studies on genetics and homosexuality. All of them have demonstrated there is no gay gene, have been discredited, or the text of the article were shown to be completely unrelated to the title of the article. The pro-homosexual bias can be very obvious at times.

Simon Levay has often been touted as having found the gay gene, yet he found no such evidence:

Simon LeVay, in his study of the hypothalamic differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men, offered the following criticisms of his own research:
"It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.

All the evidence in support of genetics and homosexuality can be similarly summarized. In regards to the APAs decision to delete homosexuality from the diagnostic manual of the American Psychiatric Association, Simon Levay further stated:

"Gay activism was clearly the force that propelled the APA to declassify homosexuality."

I quote Simon Levay because his work is often used to support something it never supported. Levay is a gay advocate.

What the evidence does support is the major factor in determining homosexuality is environment. The fact that thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle further supports the scientific studies.

The following is pulled from here:

...The following is just one of the many developmental pathways that can lead to homosexuality, but a common one. In reality, every person's "road" to sexual expression is individual, however many common lengths it may share with those of others.
(1) Our scenario starts with birth. The boy (for example) who one day may go on to struggle with homosexuality is born with certain features that are somewhat more common among homosexuals than in the population at large. Some of these traits might be inherited (genetic), while others might have been caused by the "intrauterine environment" (hormones). What this means is that a youngster without these traits will be somewhat less likely to become homosexual later than someone with them.
What are these traits? If we could identify them precisely, many of them would turn out to be gifts rather than "problems," for example a "sensitive" disposition, a strong creative drive, a keen aesthetic sense. Some of these, such as greater sensitivity, could be related to - or even the same as - physiological traits that also cause trouble, such as a greater-than-average anxiety response to any given stimulus.
No one knows with certainty just what these heritable characteristics are; at present we only have hints. Were we free to study homosexuality properly (uninfluenced by political agendas) we would certainly soon clarify these factors - just as we are doing in less contentious areas. In any case, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the behavior "homosexuality" is itself directly inherited.

There are 11 additional references at the above link which I encourage everyone to read, as it's my opinion the above summarizes the homosexual factors quite well. At this time there are no scientific arguments against the above. Unfortunately we're labeled all kinds of things if we don't just tolerate homosexual behavior, but we're supposed to accept it as valid.

And that's ridiculous. Stop and think about it. Not just tolerate, but accept a behavior that results in severe health hazards. A behavior that can, and should be, changed. The madness must stop. The truth must be told.