Ah, but in the past there were strong social pressures for having children and wives, even if homosexual. That's changing now, and I suspect that, should homosexuality come to be more socially accepted, there will be FEWER homosexuals over time as homosexuals simply refused to pretend to be heterosexual by having wives and children.
You would think, but the reverse will happen. The acceptance of homosexuality will cause more people to experiment and get involved in the lifestyle. There may be some genetic component, but anyone who thinks it is entirely genetic is smoking something.
I'll grant that, but even with social pressures to have families, homosexuals would tend to have fewer children, being less interested in the act required to produce them.
Of course, it is silly to be theorizing about a "gay gene" when we know already what creates homosexuals: molestation of children, and poor relationships between male children and fathers.
I agree with your point. And I'll further suggest that perhaps being homosexual is natures way of ensuring no reproduction because of some sort of long term problem with the genetic makeup. They can't reproduce with one another and if it weren't for artificial insemination their genetic material would die out. Which may well be what nature intends. Just a thought.