So a while back, Former Conservative found a bunch of "gotcha!" questions on the topic of homosexuality courtesy of an organization called CARM - which is all I know about them, and all I want to know about them. Former Conservative has a stronger stomach than I do: he waded through the entire list of questions and responded to all of them.
In the process, FC also made fun of them. This is an entirely understandable response - in fact, I think it's just about the only sensible response to a list like that. These are not questions in the traditional sense of "a request for more information." They're accusations that happen to be made in an interrogative format for rhetorical effect. Not only that, they're easy enough to pick apart if you can stand to expose yourself that much prolonged, concentrated idiocy: they're based on easily refuted (and in some cases mind-numbingly stupid) assumptions.
The fellow who originally posted the list of "questions", one Matt Slick, apparently noticed that someone had refuted him. So he wrote a response. And now Former Conservative has ripped apart his response as well.
All of which is a long (and possibly unnecessary) prologue for an observation that I'd like to make. Because one of the abjectly stupid ideas that Matt Slick is championing is that homosexuality is a "choice". Matt Slick isn't the only person who thinks so, of course; it's a common refrain in the anti-QUILTBAG rhetoric. And, well, I just don't see how sexual attraction can be described as a "choice" in any meaningful sense of the word.
Here's the thing: I'm a heterosexual male, and I can't even control what sort of women I find attractive. Either I find someone attractive, or I don't. It's a reaction, not a choice. I could no more choose to find men attractive than I could choose to be sexually aroused by abstract art. As far as I know, that's how attraction works for more or less everybody. So why in the hell would you think that people who happen to be attracted to members of their own sex have chosen to do so?
And even if that were possible, who would choose to have attractions that make you an automatic target for teasing, bullying, and possible persecution from every stray bigot who happens by? In what world would that possibly make sense?
So, yeah. Matt Slick and his view of homosexuality can bite me.
Edited to add: ...And then on Facebook, someone posted a link to this video detailing the top five reasons why you should choose to be gay. Warning: really, really not safe for work. Or small children. Or anyone with a particularly delicate constitution. Contains swearing and skimpy outfits.