[RACooper]

Interesting article but.......

Even with my somewhat limited knowledge of human genetics and evolutionary anthropology can poke holes in some claims in the article.

For example:
"While Kallman's was the largest relevant study until the 1990s, other studies did provide examples of monozygotic twin pairs of both sexes who were discordant for sexual orientation; that is, they found that both male and female homosexuals did sometimes have twins that were not homosexual themselves. The existence of such twins clearly demonstrates that genes are not the only factor involved in determining sexual orientation, at least not for everybody. Environmental factors, in the womb or during life, must play a role. "

Well that would actually only alter the view of the genes being dominant or recesive. Further there are many instances in the natural world of so-called "homosexual" animals, which some have claimed is a simple matter of genetic variation or mutation (anthropological term) such as hemophila or eyes having different pigmentation. I find it very hard to argue that we aren't genetically predeposed towards sexual atraction, in much they same way that people are predeposed towards increased heart failure; but each can be influenced by lifestyle and enviroment, in effect given some choice on weather or not the trait is expressed.

Personally I believe that there is a genetic pre-disposition for homosexuality, but enviromental factors also play a significant part in the expression of an individuals sexual oreintation. I've known my fair share of people that have "come-out" how tried very hard to "be straight" but eventually gave up and accepted that they are atracted to members of the same sex.