Exactly, and proof positive since there is no data that says homosexuality is an absolutely genetic characteristic. In fact, the research shows no link at all to "perhaps there's a very, very weak link." Most continually looks at environmental issues. I know what I think that means.
So, given the reality above, and knowing that Scalia is not an unlearned or unread man, then what the heck was that less than knowledgeable statement all about?
Just this: Since "gay" cannot be called a deleterious effect due to political correctness, then one can't say that children raised by gays are experiencing a deleterious upbringing because they turn out to be gay.
The question is short-circuited by a dishonest, politically correct, prior assumption.
Here's the answer Mr Scalia: "Gay" itself is deleterious. Its practitioners die 10-20 years before their peer group.
“..In fact, the research shows no link at all to “perhaps there’s a very, very weak link.” ..”
Even IF there is a genetic link, the fact that there are a significantly amount of more children who become gay, if their parents are same-sex couples, is horrible.
Homosexuals claim that it’s difficult being gay, but yet some will adopt which causes their children to have a higher risk of becoming gay themselves.
Same-sex couples who adopt are very selfish in this regard.