Light,
Quote:
A great majority of the medical profession, medical doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, and sociologists complete disagree with you.
This was your initial post to me, and what started our dialogue. This is a very nebulous statement. Just who are these 'great majority' anyway?
I have no burden to prove anything. This was your suposed refutation and I found it to be insubstancial.
My opinions are based on my own findings, and my own research. I would actually be grateful to you if you could change them, as it would mean I have become more informed than I used to be.
And that is a good thing.
If I were presented with evidence of sexuality being inate, I would rethink my position.
I have already stated some reasons why I think sexuality is not inate. I will re-itterate:
If homosexuality was genetic, the gene (or gene sequence) would/should have died out long ago due to not being passed on. Yet gay people exist.
If sexual preference were inate, what would account for the wide variety of sexual preferences/fetishes that exist?
Your hypothesis simply does not seem to fit the evidence.
