This page, on ThinkProgress LGBT, "Hate Groups Still Preach That Students Can Be ‘Indoctrinated Into Homosexual Behavior’," in this thread, has seen my comment reply removed twice. Perhaps a word sent it to moderation and it will yet show up. I'm posting it here regardless:
Identical twins are never identical. We all should know that. However, the fingerprint analogy is missing the point that they are both born with fingers, barring some major error. The idea that heterosexuality versus homosexuality is some subtle difference on the order of minor variations in fingerprints is simply not apt. It is more akin to being born with or without fingers.
In addition, if you were correct, it would fly in the face of all the homosexualist propaganda that has been spread about the various twin studies. The claim has been that those studies confirm a genetic basis, which is incorrect.
Paul Omar Lervåg,
Furthermore, just because some families are fully homosexual does not prove a genetic basis. It does not, of itself, rule out total environmental (nurture versus nature) causes. Families impact upon themselves generationally. You write as if that doesn't exist.
Also, there are many people who believed as you claim (about being exclusively homosexual) only to change. They were not considered, nor did they consider themselves, bi-sexual. The fact is that sexual attraction is something that can definitely be conditioned into people. All other things being equal, how else can homosexual pedophilic rape of non-homosexual youths becoming then same-sex attracted be fully explained? It happens all the time whether you conveniently choose to ignore it or not.
You are mistaken, ill-informed, and misleading others. You are suffering from cognitive dissonance. You have not undergone radical reconditioning only to remain exclusively attracted to the same sex. You also can't speak for those who want to undergo change and who don't give up but seek and find. I have heard from many of them.
You mentioned your upbringing, but what you mentioned is far from enough to rule out environmental causes versus genetic. You may very well fit the more typical patterns concerning family. The fact that one's parents professed Christianity doesn't explain everything. SOCE usually goes into father-son and mother-son relationships. Whether or not you were ever sexually abused would also factor in. It doesn't stop there though. There's a whole world of indoctrination, socialization, various forms of conditioning, to consider.
Are you for outlawing homosexually raped children from being able to receive psychological and psychiatric help for their unwanted same-sex attraction? Do you think a penis in an anus and up a rectum, using the rectum as a vagina, is wholesome and healthy whether physically or mentally (not that those two things are ever mutually exclusive)? If it is not, and I say it is not, then what does that mean for male homosexuality? It doesn't stop natural heterosexual procreation. It should preclude the main male homosexual sexual activity though. It is either that or all homosexuals would continue engaging in other sexual acts absent anal sex, but that would go against the vast majorities attraction, proving my point.
It will be interesting to see whether or not you actually answer the questions. As for how far you are prepared to go on the psychoanalytical couch right here, so to speak, well, just how far are you prepared to go to show that you don't fit the environmentally impacted pattern? Regardless, you don't speak for all of the people who are, or ever have been, same-sex attracted.
You are not speaking for me. The answer is truth, not killing people.