Please. I know some here refuse to accept it, but being gay has a biological basis. No one chooses to be gay. You are, or you're not. I sure as hell know that even when I was a kid, absolutely nothing (not even the oh-so-terrible Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, obviously the worst thing since Stalin) could have convinced me to find some guy's hairy butt attractive.
You have gay people, and straight people, and gay people being absolutely miserable while pretending to be straight. What you DON'T have is straight people pretending to be gay, at least not in anything remotely resembling a statistically significant number.
VR
Even the sodomites admit it's a lifestyle "choice".
Please explain it's biological origin. Where is the defective gene located?
Years ago, Barbara Walters was doing a laudatory interview of a gay celebrity couple - Melissa Etheridge and her lesbian "wife". The main point of the feature seemed to be to celebrate gay couples and portray them as perfectly normal. I could only stomach maybe 3 or 4 minutes of it, but I wanted to shout "Whoa! Stop! Rewind that again!" when Melissa's S.O. was telling how they met. In her own words, she described being happily married to some man who had some kind of recording industry job. According to her, she wasn't already looking to leave the marriage, nor was she attracted to lesbianism. But when she met Melissa, the force of her personality was so great that it just swept her away. She divorced her husband and entered into a lesbian relationship. And I'm thinking, "Hey! Don't they realize that even though they're trying their darndest to promote gay behavior with this TV feature, they just aired something that blows away one of their main talking points - namely that people are either born gay or they aren't?"
So much for the lie, "no one chooses to be gay". Certainly I would agree with a statement like, "many people did not choose to be gay". But the blanket statement you made is untrue. And as long as their are a large number of adolescents who could tip either way in their sexuality based at least partly on the cultural messages they soak in, then the issue of "recruitment" will always be important - especially to conservative parents. It's not the big "non-issue" the Left (and quasi-libertarian brainwashees of Hollywood) pretend that it is.
The basis is at least partly biological, but probably it's a lot more environmental than biological, from what I've read. I wish I had saved the article, but in around 1990 or 1991 there was a report in one of the major scientific journals on some big study done of "identical twins raised apart". They found the most interesting correlations! With things such as hair or eye color you would naturally expect to find a 100% correlation. But things that you would expect to have a 0% correlation were not always that way - Things such as whether they were pet owners, and whether they preferred cats or dogs. Things like marital status and even what they named their kids or pets had nonzero correlations. And sexual orientation was also a nonzero correlation. Now, if homosexuality is entirely genetic then you'd expect to see close to 100% correlation, and if it is entirely environmental then you'd expect to see 0%. As I recall, this particular figure was nearer to 0% than to 50% (can't swear to that) - but it definitely was not zero.
The important fact is that genes can PREDISPOSE someone to a certain orientation, but can't force them into it. Similarly, they have found genes that affect your chances of becoming an alcoholic, and genes that affect your chances of being obese or overweight, and genes that can give you lifelong learning disabilities. The good news is that in almost all categories of behavior, we are NOT prisoners of our genes. But depending on our genetic makeup, some of will have a lot tougher uphill road to climb in order to stay sober, or to stay slim, or to become educated, or to be heterosexual.