As for your host of replies, I encourage you or anybody to point them out. I'll be waiting but I won't be holding my breath.
Wow. You finally provided a reference. Unfortunately for you I'm familiar with Bailey and Pillard's 1991 work along with their 1993 work. That database I mentioned earlier in the thread? Well, people like yourself, who pretend they know what they're talking about but really have a profound ignorance on the subject of homosexuality; that database is your worst enemy.
In both studies Bailey and Pillard advertised in homosexual publications and then had those who responded recruit their friends. Whoops. Besides that, their study on twins doesn't support your claim that genes play a huge role in homosexuality, and Bailey and Pillard would be the first to tell you that. Obviously you don't know anything about their study. And if you do and you call it objective science, well then we all know where your agenda is... as if we didn't already know.
The 1994 Gladue cite is in reference to the biopsychology of sexual orientation and says nothing remotely close to genes playing a huge part. You haven't read this study either. As all those who came before you, you must have pulled this information from the internet somewhere without knowing the content.
Gladue did make an appropriate statement for you: "If research is buried it will only come back to bite us later." You've been bit, or better, caught, by studies that don't support your position.
Even though you tried to support your position, this is more obfuscation.