People who get to know themselves make choices they might not have earlier in their lives.
I surmise that people in my years that were not heterosexual had few choices, and s0me picked the least miserable choice, when in the spotlight. Maybe the lucky ones were bisexual, and may or may not have thrived.
My point was that people deal. I am old enough to look back and seeing one or the other gay person marrying, in the olden sense.
It's just a person's preference. I prefer tea over hot chocolate, but that doesn't mean I have a food disorder.
This is the original statement that led me to point out preference implies choice, which only had relevance because the person making the statement indicated a belief that homosexuals do not choose their sexual orientation.
If you prefer homosexuality to heterosexuality you are choosing one as more favorable than the other, not declaring one is possible and the other is impossible.
A gay man who cannot choose his sexual orientation can certainly choose to marry a straight woman because he prefers (among other choices) a life in which people assume he is heterosexual to one in which people suspect he is homosexual.
If a man prefers sex with another man over sex with a woman, and homosexuals cannot choose their sexual orientation, the man is not a homosexual...because clearly he can choose to have heterosexual sex.
I have no idea whether or not all homosexual men can make love to women, by which I mean a sex act which involves the woman as the source of the man's arousal, but if they can, and they still self-identify as homosexual, then they have chosen their sexual orientation based on preference.
Frankly, I don't think the issue of choice is all that important.
There as another interesting thread in which it was suggested that, to a large extent, insisting that homosexuals had no choice in their sexual orientation implied that homosexuality was wrong or immoral. That, in effect, it was an attempt to excuse homosexuality.
"They can't help it...it's genetic
I don't believe that there are non-sexual characteristics of either gays or lesbians that inherently make them better or worse parents, individually, than heterosexuals.
I do, however, believe that all else being roughly equal it is better for a child to be raised by opposite sex parents, and that they should be given preference over homosexual couples in terms of adoption.
Ultimately, a child is much better off with loving parents in a stable home than in foster care, and it would be a crime to deprive them of that opportunity simply because of the sexual orientation of the parents.