I don't know what your issue is with homosexuals. Is it because you hate to be called a fag? I don't have to explain more of what I just stated because it's common sense. Scientists haven't found a gay gene, well it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or should they exist in the first place? Can they identify the gene responsible for what kind of men I'm attracted to or my favorite color? It's all about chemistry and what turns you on. What about actors who play gay roles? Do they have that gay gene? Homosexuality is a genetic trait and I don't think it's a fuse in chromosome or any abnormality in the genes or any of that sort. It's both psychological and hormonal I would think.<quoted text>
Epileptics, Tourette's patients and others aren't considered mentally handicapped in that way either. I never claimed that gays were mentally handicapped in a cognitive way. They have a medical symptom which may be the result of biology or environment. Some may have genetic reasons for the symptom, but not all. A lot of effort was made to find the "gay" gene. Nothing was found.
Freud's abstractions are awful. Even modern psychology is pathetic. Here's a good government source quote.
"The accuracy of psychiatric diagnosis was the highest for cognitive disorders 60%, followed by depression 50% and anxiety disorders 46%, whereas the accuracy of diagnosing psychosis was 0%."
Well, who's to say who is political and who isn't? The question is, if homosexuality is a medical problem, then is it sensible to address it constitutionally? Race? Sex? Part of the human condition and consistent with evolution. Religion? Sexual preference? Not so absolute.
We protect the medically afflicted. We don't nurture their conditions.
"Both classes of male and female hormones are present in both males and females alike, but in vastly different amounts."