Jack Thompson Submits Gay Porn to District Court Judge, Judge is Outraged.

[PlagueOfLocust]

You're avoiding what my argument is showing you yourself must believe in order to say what you said. That is, taking your argument further leads to a claim that it is a defect. "It was an alteration" yes... which created a defect. That there are gay animals really doesn't mean anything for your argument; gay animals aren't the norm. Even if they occur naturally (purely in the sense that they aren't altered by man), that does not mean their behavior is natural. That's why they die out; they're unproductive. Arguably, if they were natural they would thrive.

The first two quotes don't mean anything to me. The people in religious organizations do not create/recreate that external moral code I was talking about, so why is what they say being heeded here?

A little quote of my own to counter the others, this one being more complete:

"There is much controversy going on as to whether homosexuality is genetic or environmental in origin. Homosexuals are desperately looking for any evidence that would seem to confirm that they were "born homosexuals." It should be easy to understand why, for if "God made them that way" then it is not their fault they are homosexual and it must not be a sin to act out their desires. So any research that might suggest a genetic origin is quickly offered as a defense. But the vested interest that homosexuals have often prevent them (and more "liberal thinking" heterosexuals) from seeing the obvious.
For example, recent studies done with identical twins have been offered by some as evidence that the origins of homosexuality might be in the genes. In one study, Dr. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University examined 110 pairs of identical twins who had been separated at birth and raised in different environments. He found that if one was gay there was a 52% chance the other was also. But among fraternal twins, the chance fell to 22%. Because the ratio was higher among twins who are genetically identical, this study has been referred to by many as evidence that homosexuality is genetic in origin. I even heard Dr. Dean Edell (a famous radio call-in doctor) appeal to this study in defense of homosexuality.

I may be missing something here, but the reason why identical twins are such fascinating subjects of scientific study is because they ARE alike genetically. Therefore, if homosexuality is solely genetic in origin, then if one twin is gay, you would expect the chances of the other twin being gay to be 100%! The fact that only 52% of those who were identical in genetic makeup to their homosexual twin were gay themselves would strongly confirm that genetics alone does not make one homosexual!

This study would rather confirm that though there may be genetic factors that increase the likelihood of one becoming a homosexual, these genetic factors alone do not produce homosexuality (as in the case of 48% of those heterosexuals whose identical twin was homosexual). There must also be environmental factors for homosexuality to develop.

...In this regard, it is not much different than alcoholism, where similar studies involving identical twins have shown similar results. All it confirms is that there may be some people with a genetic likelihood of developing a "predisposition" toward such things as homosexuality and alcoholism, but it requires the addition of environmental factors to produce the actual homosexual or alcoholic."