There will be fewer openly homosexual individuals in a repressive society. That doesn't mean there are fewer actual homosexuals.

you would think homosexualism would be promoted by the government in an over-populated country which puts restrictions on family size. does anyone have a "Homosexual Demographic World Map"? lol

You'll never get accurate numbers on something that people could get their ass kicked, or worse, for admitting to.

Nope. They're just more accepted and therefore not having to hide it.

And when you fall in love with someone, someone else could tell you that you could easily choose someone else.

But maybe you couldn't.

Not according to the US Embassy.

What is wrong with it? Specifically.

You can not assume all homosexuality is a choice because a few people have chosen to be homosexuals. If only one person is genetically homosexual you have to assume everyone is until you find out otherwise.

Personally I believe it's both unnatural and unholy.

But, the $64 question is, what difference does it make in a free country?

Unholy I won't go into but unnatural?

Over 500 species have been found to perform some sort of homosexual behavior, many of them being apes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15750604/

It doesn't until we get into laws. A law has to assume that it is genetic because we are in a republic but individual people can think what they want.

True, but aren't mutations flaws in the DNA? And they are abundant in life and species. In fact they are important to evolution. So couldn't being homosexual be a genetic flaw? Not saying it's wrong, just speculating. I kinda agree with unnatural-it doesn't help reproduction, one of the controversial meanings of life.

DNA? Mutations?

I think homosexuality is natural for that very reason. If every human being engaged in relationships for the purpose of reproduction, we'd all have been dining on Soylent Green for quite some time now.