You're a spin doctor, but since you don't seem very knowledgeable about the basics of genetics and embryology it doesn't work in your favor.

You don't realize it but this only strengthens my point, that from a biological POW there is no difference between homosexuality and ADHD when it comes to classifying something as a disorder or not.

You can't make the clear distinction that you just made though. The only thing you can say for certain is that heritability is stronger for ADHD than it is for homosexuality, which in turn suggests that the genetical disposition also is stronger for ADHD than for homosexuality. But most likely there exists some genetical disposition to at least some forms of homosexuality, and some epigenetic factors that affect ADHD.

If anything, the conclusions from the claims you present above are that homosexuality resembles an illness/disorder/defect more than ADHD does and that homosexuality is a trait less selected for from an evolutionary POV than ADHD is. Do you realize that what you now make a big deal out of promotes the idea that homosexuality is an "illness" or defect?

I've been very patient with you, but your devotion to peddling inane horseshit from the 1970s as fact has driven a wedge into the discussion.

Couple things here:

You aren't a geneticist, biologist, psychologist, or physicist so stop peddling your suppositions and decade old knowledge as facts.

I've backed up every single point I've made with research and sources so you can educate yourself on a topic in which time and time again you prove your deficiency in knowledge. 

I can only assume you're content living in blissful ignorance, but I'll respond to this last pile of shit before I stop responding to you in this thread.

 from a biological POW there is no difference between homosexuality and ADHD when it comes to classifying something as a disorder or not

I guess you meant POV but missed the "V" key by about 3 inches (?)

Do they classify being left-handed as a disorder? No, your case fails. 

If anything, the conclusions from the claims you present above are that homosexuality resembles an illness/disorder/defect more than ADHD does

Clearly you don't understand. What I have shown is that epi-marks influence a predisposition to homosexuality. Epi-marks are also thought to be responsible for left-handedness. This is vastly different to ADHD, which is thought to be genetically controlled. 

homosexuality is a trait less selected for from an evolutionary POV than ADHD

Neither are "selected" traits from natural selection. Another topic in which you're clearly deficient.

I won't be responding to you any further; it isn't moving anywhere with your endless suppositions and appeal to authority, while refraining from posting any sources for anything.

Good day to you.

A poster ("wick") came into the thread saying he believes homosexuality is an illness.

You opposed him and presented 2 arguments:

1. "I hope you aren't suggesting the obsolete 1970s notion that it's a brain disorder."

- I tried to show you that the reason for that is because society has changed and politics have changed, not that the underlying biology has anyothing to do with it. Therefore it's a legitimate opinion to regard homosexuality as a brain disorder from a biological POV.

2. "Homosexuality, much like being left-handed, is controlled by epigenetic markers which promote a predisposition."

- which was a smoke and mirrors argument because it didn't give any legitimacy to your claim but it gave the impression of doing it, so I had to address that and explain that the science is not as clear about it as you made it sound.

Instead of saying

"Homosexuality, much like being left-handed, is controlled by epigenetic markers which promote a predisposition."

You could have said

"Homosexuality, much like Down's syndrome, is controlled by epigenetic markers which promote a predisposition."

Which is just as true. But that sentence would have weakened your own argument.

But there's an obvious legal reason you can't marry a dog, it's the same reason you aren't allowed to fuck it.  Gay coupling doesn't fall in the same category.  If you don't allow someone to marry and love their consenting partner then yes that does mean you see them or atleast their relationship as lesser than you/yours.  

this is quite a nice article to read gay community http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/gay-sex-vs-straight-sex/

a large poll over 4,8 million people. straigth and gays.

making pretty much less different then anyone think.

What do you fucking know about the law of nature.

This is a completely stupid argument since most animal species are "homosexual" or even hermaphrodite.

And if gay people have been around since the dawn of time it very well means that it's completely natural (not meaning it should touch or concern everyone, but that it has always existed amongst humans), so there's no other way around than to respect them and have them as equal as we are.

the reminded me this

In 1978, God changed his mind about black people. God changed is mind about the earth was not flat. he will change is mind and figth the good figth about the gay rigth in a couple of year.

yes he do has done some bad decision like teaming up with Bush in Irak ... but he learned is lesson.

god is awesome!

Most animals eat their own shit and dead babies too.

Just becuse animals do it doesn't make it right for people to do it.

We already have gay marriage since 2003 in Belgium. France always do the same things as us but ten years later.