"somewhat" regarded? They're strongly correlated to DNA expression.

Bolded: that's heavily debated and among the expertise it nowadays clearly leans towards inheritance playing the bigger part. At least in the medical field it does. And there's recent studies that strongly support this, studies that show that human happiness doesn't correlate very well at all with your circumstances, your social position or how lucky or unlucky you are in life, but is determined largely by your natural predisposition.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/03/06/happiness-is-in-the-genes-say-scottish-scientists-86908-20341535/

EDIT: unlucky last sentence, so I added the word "largely" there for clarification.

I don't. Nowhere in that post did I refer to heterosexuality per se. Nothing about attraction whatsoever. Re-read the aversion part which is (partly) the root of homophobia.

The researchers found that those who do not excessively worry and who are sociable and conscientious tend to be happier - and that these traits are as much as 50 per cent controlled by genetics, with external factors such as relationships, health and careers contributing to differences in happiness.

Look, 50% is determined by genetics. And 50% is environment.

Where's it say genes are the larger factor as you are clearly implying?

Happiness doesn't correlate with circumstances... are you serious? If I was living in the streets, I'd be miserable. If I was in a penthouse with $500 million in the bank, I'd be pretty damn happy.

Don't twist those facts when they're not saying what you're saying at all.

*rereads* ...you're saying a dislike of having sex with another man.

That's heterosexuality. Homophobia is the hatred of two men or women being in love. The idea of not wanting to have sex with another man isn't homophobia. If someone does not care if two men have sex but doesn't want to have sex with a man, would you say they're homophobic?

"Attraction to the opposite sex (at the expense of attraction to the same sex)" should be undnerstood as heterosexuality, otherwise you are bisexual. Heterosexuality is by nature an attraction to the opposite sex and not the same sex. You are not describing homophobia with that qualifier. Not wanting to hav homosexual relations does not indicate any degree of homophobia, it just indicates heterosexuality.

A good part of what we think and feel, and the way we actually do it, comes from our genes. It may be hard to accept guys, but the truth is that stuff like intelligence, hapiness and even the kind of things and people will enjoy and like or hate are partly determined before we are even born, but that's how things are.

What we can do is prove our status as the only rational, intelligent beings in the planet by trying to overcome or ignore instincts that doesn't go according to rightly principles brought by our own best thinking, and the ones of the society we live in.

It may seem kinda off topic, but seeing the articles slimebest are posting made me remember of it. It could help the discussion, after all. 

Don't put words into my mouth. I didn't say it doesn't. But relatively speaking happiness doesn't correlate well with circumstances, no.

Yeah, happiness correlates (in that study) to 50% with the environment, but I never said otherwise. I implied it though, the last sentence in that post was unlycky (Ill edit it). My main point was ti point to this stude to prove that the happiness hormones that lestatdark was talking about will have an even smaller correlation to the environment since I just proved that happiness, which is determined by so much more than just serotonine and dopamine, is no more than 50% determined by the environment.

"that's heavily debated and among the expertise it nowadays clearly leans towards inheritance playing the bigger part. At least in the medical field it does."

Forgive me, but you sorta said that genes>environment for happiness there.

Well, just change the nut licking part with watching two men tongue kissing with each other or somethung.

The thimg about Slimebeast is that he equates "heterosxuality" with "repulsion towards homosexual acts" (for example he thinks that seeing two men kissing should automatically cause a heterosexual man to throw up).

For him the ideea of heterosexuals simply being indifferent towards homosexaul acts is inconcievable, because he equates "indifference towards homosexual acts" to "bisexuality". For him if you have to be repulsed by gays to be staright.