[jtminton]

If homosexuality is really a genetic thing, then wouldn't they eventually become extinct? They wouldn't be able to reproduce and the gene would fade away. Since I don't really see that happening, I can't buy the I-was-born-this-way argument.

[Salman]

If homosexuality is really a genetic thing, then wouldn't they eventually become extinct? They wouldn't be able to reproduce and the gene would fade away.

I don't think it's genetic, but your argument is flawed. Most homosexuals have normal sex at some time in their lives. Some are even married (I mean real marriage).

[Semper_guy]

I've seen a lot of arguments for and against gay marriage. Given that the divorce rate is already above fifty percent, it's not like us straights have a moral headlock on the institution.

and although the link is made often, and I think unfairly, there is no real connection between homsexuality and pedophilia. Most child molesters are in fact heterosexual. Linking the change in marriage laws to endangering kids is a little unreasonable I think.

Love the site, keep it up.

[JesseHousman]

...wouldn't they eventually become extinct?

Not hardly. Thanks to sycophantic "educators" giving them podium time in schools, they're in their recruitment mode!

It's all part of the homosexual agenda underwritten by looney liberals.

[Modernman]

If homosexuality is really a genetic thing, then wouldn't they eventually become extinct?

The homosexual gene (if it exists) could be recessive, so heterosexuals could carry a "gay" gene and pass it on for generations until they had offspring with another person who was a carrier for the gene. If they both passed on the gay gene, their child would be gay.

Another possibility is that the gay gene requires something else to trigger it, or that homosexuality is caused by a combination of several different genes.

[Old Professer]

Has stupidity become extinct?

[xm177e2]

If homosexuality is really a genetic thing, then wouldn't they eventually become extinct?

That's not the argument. The argument is that it's biologically based, not genetically based. There is a tremendous difference between the two. If an unborn female child, for example, is exposed to testosterone in the womb, she might develop male characteristics (both psychological as well as physical). That is not necessarily determined by genetics, but would nonetheless be biological in nature and outside of her control.