Yup, was going to point it out until I scrolled down to your post.

Ironically, using that twisted logic, Christians would be able to prove that God exist: " I am not wrong and you have no way of proving im wrong when I say God exist, wich proves im right"

No, but I would want another son. I personally want my family name to be passed down biologically, not just via the name.

If there is a "gay gene" then wouldn't it be concievable that it could possibly be cured.   But otherwise no, I would not.  Personality is infinately more important than sexuality.  And there are personality types of hate of every sexuality.  I wouldn't want my kid to be an arragont ass jock, just like I wouldn't want my kid to be a flamboyant loud musical man.  FYI: I have nothing against jocks or musicals, hell i was in sports and musicals growing up.

You do realize he can have his sperm put into a surrogate and thus your family biologically would continue.

I do agree with you though that I want myself to continue as well, and would be dissapointed if said son decided to adopt and refused artificial insemination as an option.  

My family has seemingly always been somewhat large.  Of course our grandparents had bigger families, but I don't think any relatives of mine have less than 3 kids.  Most have exactly four.  I can see myself having around 4 as well, but for sure will have at least two.  That is if I can.  If it seems i can't, i sure as hell will have  a blast trying.  And I will not give up, if i have to have unprotected sex every day of my life until my wifes menopause, if that's the sacrifice i have to make.  lol.

@bold. See what you want to see, I was on vacation and did not read the remaining posts in the thread (which included yours) in a session prior to when I posted.

Because a gene is passed from your parents to you. It's impossible for two people of the same gender to have a child.

The OP wasn't hating on anyone for their sexuality.

Different things are activated and deactived in your genetic "coding," and there's always the chance of mutation. Hopefully someone a lot smarter than myself can explain this better, and in more depth.

I get what you're saying, you explained it perfectly.

...And I guess that could be true. But it is odd that no one has ever found a trace of this gay "gene."

Well considering the fact that about 97% of our genetic code was considered "junk" only until recently, no this isn't at all odd. There are literally millions if not billions of switches within this previously considered "junk" that control every facet of our biology. I suspect a series of switches within is responsible for homosexuality, heterosexuality, and bisexuality.

The notion that homosexuality is a choice is really quite unfounded considering its prevalence in nature. Just because one discovers later in life they are a certain sexuality, does not lend any credence to the postulate that it is a choice. This is merely discovering what has existed since birth.