RE :”Rented wombs, donated eggs and IVF. Which seems to indicate that the *100% homosexual* home environment has a greater influence than the 50% gene pool.”
I was joking a bit with that question.
The study should have separated children raised by same sex couples into separate study statistics for offspring (related) and adopted to compare, and it may have. That would be interesting.
The saddest consequence of these ‘modern’ families is the enormous adjustment/pressures the children have to endure from their peers and other parents.
The sexual ‘choices’ of these children are clearly driven by the ‘parenting’ environment and perhaps a sense of justification for their family structures.
Most difficult, must be children of phony heterosexual marriages that break up when one partner decides to ‘come out’ and partner up with a same-sex ‘step-parent’.
Selfish morons.
I cannot wrap my mind around allowing orphaned or abandoned innocent children to be adopted into these dysfunctional situations.
I think a more interesting study would be the number of kids of heterosexual parents who say they are homosexual, vs the number of kids that come out of a family where the mother or father later claim they are homosexual, who say they too are homosexual.
Because there are a lot of homosexual kids born to heterosexual parents. But I don’t yet recall any cases where kids in a family where the father “announced” they were gay also came out and said they were gay.
You’d think that if homosexuality was purely genetic that you’d get more homosexual kids from a relationship between a gay man and a straight woman, than with a straight couple.
Of course, if you discount in-vitro fertilization and other “rented womb” births (which really are a very small part of the births in this country), then you’d have to expect that the push to “normalize” homosexuality at a young age would pretty much spell the end to homosexuality, since no homosexuals would mate, and their gene pool would be wiped out.