How can you conclude that? Evolution allows for mutation. It even requires it. It's entirely possible that a mutation is responsible for homosexuality.
Of course, such a mutation might not get very far, but even homosexuals sometimes have children, so such mutations might be passed on.
More often molestation.
Well, that's the point - any "gay gene" mutation would be exceedingly rare, as it strikes right at the heart of what makes natural selection work - reproduction. Some homosexuals may have children... not a heck of a lot of them, though, and certainly not enough to represent 1% of the population. The very nature of such a gene would cause it to be on the losing end of the natural selection process.
If it were genetic, then more than 50% of identical twins would be gay. The 50% number implies that it is not genetic since identical twins share the same genetic makeup. Or if it is genetic, then some twins can control that behavior.
If it were genetic, then more than 50% of identical twins would be gay. The 50% number implies that it is not genetic since identical twins share the same genetic makeup. Or if it is genetic, then some twins can control that behavior.