Is homosexuality a choice or ...
I put forward several studies that have been done that show homosexuality is more by choice and environment and falls under a mindset rather than a biological imperative or being of genetic origin:
Can you tell me when you decided to be heterosexual? Or did you always know?
Wouldn't it have been evolved out by now?
Why? Why would you expect the genetic traits that govern attraction should always be aligned with the genetic traits for reproduction apparatus during the process of reproduction? Especially when there are several gene sites that could be involved?
You do realize that there are many animals with homosexual individuals along with heterosexuals (and that they are not persecuted by their fellow beings)?
Bonobos (pygmy chimps) are perhaps the best known.
... or is it some biological process.
... and environment ...
If it is a biological process that occurs during fetal development due to hormones then this is logically going to be a common recurring result, and still not a choice on the part of the individual.
If it is a biological process it should have been eradicated by evolution right?
If the biological conditions that produce the hormones affecting the fetal development are commonly replicated there should be no reason for results to change.
If it is not a biological process and a result of choice and environment then it shouldn't be protected under the law any more than any other choice/environment option (like say vegetarianism). So which side does it fall under and what are the scientific and lawful implications?
Your purported choice to be heterosexual should also not be protected in that case, logically speaking, and thus laws should treat all people equally regardless of sexual orientation.
The scientific implications are that we don't know yet all the causes or reasons, but studies have shown than one cannot decide to be other than what they are (see Vimsey above and I have had similar experience). Whether it is strictly genetic, strictly hormone\environment\developmental or a combination is really irrelevant: the people are still fully human beings and members of the species Homo sapiens sapiens
. Scientifically there is no more difference than there is between any two individuals.
The lawful implications are what we as society decide to do in making laws, and whether we want those laws to be equitable and just in their treatment of individuals or we want to be oppressive and discriminatory.
And in a country where we purportedly value independence, liberty, justice and equality, it seems to me logical that there should be no restriction on how people want to behave in private between consenting adults.
As far as laws go, I would propose that these guidelines should apply:
First do no harm or through inaction cause harm to occur
Second do unto others as you would have them do unto you
Finally I note that the preamble to the constitution states:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
We have become more perfect with time as we have increased the freedom and liberty of others, more just in our laws treating people as equals, but there is still room to grow and become even more perfect still.
The constitution doesn't list exceptions. It gives no preference to any religious beliefs or biased beliefs.