i meant "not genetic" in terms of the Gay Gene people talk about
A lot of anti-gay, religious people use that (or the lack of it) to justify their position
Hah. Nothing's that simple.
As someone who is pretty much unconcerned about
any ramifications of what we're discussing, I feel free to
speak without such limitation.
What's not that simple? I wasn't suggesting it was simple. The opposite actually.
I'm not speaking with any limitations either
I know. I CAN read what you write.
The idea of a 'gay gene' is terribly simplistic,
and I presume the work of the religious, stating
that such hasn't been 'found' so homosexuality
is choice, or some such.
As to limitations, it's unlikely. Who one is always affects
one's arguments. I think my vantage on this makes
me less likely to be so affected.