First, I never said homosexuality is caused by a mutation. Where is that coming from? Second, your statement is logically flawed. Once again, why do you assume homosexuality and heterosexuality are the same? And are from the same source? Do you just have trouble since both have to do with sexuality? Because there is no reason that they must be the same.
I never accused you of saying homosexuality is caused by mutation but sexual orientation in general is either derived from a mutation of a gene or a gene exists itself. If a gene doesn't exist, it must be a mutation of a certain gene that gives us the desire to be interested in Men or Women. If a mutation of a gene causes heterosexuality, it means homosexuality can come from the same source as they are both sexual orientations.
The problem with you is you only accept heterosexuality as sexual orientation. That's wrong. There are more than one options when sexual orientation is decided. Since there are many options, they must come from the same place. Since homosexuality and heterosexuality are both sexual orientations, they are derived from the same place, whether that is the mind, or the genes but where one comes from, the other does as well.
Sex drive is an instinctie urge right? Yet there is no gene for sex drive, but for sex hormones. So while there is no gene for sexuality, there are many genes related to it.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/11/021118070025.htmThis article should explain that you are wrong here.
You simply cannot assume that homosexuality has the same source as heterosexuality. So why must this be true? You keep stating this as fact, and when I ask for evience to support it, you just restate it as fact again. THAT my friend is bad logic. You can't support your conclusion WITH your conclusion. Logic 101.
Premise 1: Sexual orientation includes heterosexuality and homosexuality.
Premise 2: Heterosexuality can be derived from the genes.
Conclusion: Homosexuality can be derived from the genes.
Nice theory, too bad it is not supported by science. They have been studying homosexuality for decades and there is no evidence whatsoever that homosexuality is a mutation. You can't just make stuff up here.
There is also no evidence that heterosexuality is in the genes. You believe it's nature, but we all know that what someone believes means nothing...
Why? Again, what makes you think so. I keep asking this and you have no answer. Just stop and think for a second. There is really no reason why one must be dependent on the other. Especially if they are unrelated, as I suggest.
See above.