Children are not sexual. Now you could say that at puberty, their genes are expressing themselves and so is their sexual preference, but you could just as easily say that by the time they hit puberty, they have been conditioned by their environment to be a certain way.
Look into how many homosexuals experienced sexual abuse, particularly at the hands of a family member. I have a hunch that homosexuality is a type of mind virus that replicates through abuse. The person who goes through that and is unable to cope with it unconsciously seeks out circumstances where they can recreate the event, inflicting it on an innocent and becoming a predator in the process.
That's why you often see extremely inappropriate behavior at these "gay pride" events involving children. Even if you accepted that degeneracy as normal sexual behavior, what kind of person would bring a kid to that event?
It's fine to speculate, who knows the cause, but I'm sure you could see why it would be in the interest of many gays and liberals for the cause to be genetic in nature. It would mean no responsibility for their behavior, and it would give them a reason to enforce acceptance. ("it's normal!")
Now if it was genetic, why is it so rare? People have rare disorders and the like, but if there was some evolutionary advantage in terms of survival (which is a common argument by liberals) then you would think it might be expressed by something more like 15% of the population instead of being less than 1%.
Thinking about it logically, homosexuality is equivalent to being sterile. It has negative value and cannot be considered the norm or beneficial because engaging in it means you are ending your genetic line. If you accept evolution based on increasing your odds of survival and subsequently reproduction (the ultimate goal) then how could homosexuality help?
Edit: Adding to my suspicion, the poster I was originally responding to admits he is homosexual and is trying to convince me that children are born with sexual preferences. That strikes me as a rationalization for his condition, considering that I know children well and have never ever seen anything to indicate sexuality before puberty.
Children are not sexual. Now you could say that at puberty, their genes are expressing themselves and so is their sexual preference, but you could just as easily say that by the time they hit puberty, they have been conditioned by their environment to be a certain way.
Look into how many homosexuals experienced sexual abuse, particularly at the hands of a family member. I have a hunch that homosexuality is a type of mind virus that replicates through abuse. The person who goes through that and is unable to cope with it unconsciously seeks out circumstances where they can recreate the event, inflicting it on an innocent and becoming a predator in the process.
That's why you often see extremely inappropriate behavior at these "gay pride" events involving children. Even if you accepted that degeneracy as normal sexual behavior, what kind of person would bring a kid to that event?
It's fine to speculate, who knows the cause, but I'm sure you could see why it would be in the interest of many gays and liberals for the cause to be genetic in nature. It would mean no responsibility for their behavior, and it would give them a reason to enforce acceptance. ("it's normal!")
Now if it was genetic, why is it so rare? People have rare disorders and the like, but if there was some evolutionary advantage in terms of survival (which is a common argument by liberals) then you would think it might be expressed by something more like 15% of the population instead of being less than 1%.
Thinking about it logically, homosexuality is equivalent to being sterile. It has negative value and cannot be considered the norm or beneficial because engaging in it means you are ending your genetic line. If you accept evolution based on increasing your odds of survival and subsequently reproduction (the ultimate goal) then how could homosexuality help?
Edit: Adding to my suspicion, the poster I was originally responding to admits he is homosexual and is trying to convince me that children are born with sexual preferences. That strikes me as a rationalization for his condition, considering that I know children well and have never ever seen anything to indicate sexuality before puberty.