When did the topic shift from Nature vs. Nuture to right and wrong? Falkoner, regardless of whether you think a person's sexual orientation is "right" or "wrong" is irrelevant. Nobody is forcing you to take part in this debate, which is nature vs. nurture. You are more than welcome to open another topic on the morality of the issue, but posts such as yours do not belong here.

What post are you reading? I am not talking about choice and did not mention it at all and your second sentence completely contradicts your first sentence. The fact that you are saying there is no sure proof of nature or nuture means it can be debated. I made no assumptions in that post.

The misunderstanding arose because your original post failed to clearly conclude that fault has no effect on right or wrong. Your post wouldn't be making the same point as my post, because as you said you weren't making a comment on right or wrong at all. You were just providing an opposing example to the issue of fault.

No, it means it can't be debated, because unless you have access to an experiment to test thousands of people, any debate you make is opinion. You commented by asking, "So it's your fault you're straight"? Which means that you were taking what I said the wrong way, and debating an invalid point.
You would be able to say that, had I not been using what Loser_Musician had written himself. Fault was the word that he used. I was using his word, and I was talking to him. I used the word "fault" to show an example of how his train of thought could lead to things like murderers being freed from jail. I had no obligation to clarify anything to you because I wasn't talking to you yet. That was why the misunderstanding arose.

But if people find it to be 'okay' but not 'right' then that makes it nurture, as they don't find it correct in their minds, they just don't find it wrong.

As previously stated, being male and being very feminine does not make him gay, and being female and being very masculine does not make her lesbian. It does not make them bisexual either. I personally know some men who are very feminine and are far from being homosexual or bisexual even. Also, who is to say that the psychological part of it is not more simply about liking more masculine or more feminine traits and not about gender?

Speaking of propaganda, some of the pro-gay/pro-lesbian propaganda is likely making some people think they are that way when they are not really. For example, some people may think they are homosexual because they seem to not be attracted to the opposite gender when most likely they have simply not found the right person yet. Not everyone is attracted to everyone of the opposite gender; people do have their preferences. Some people may not even be attracted to anyone at all of the opposite gender except just the right person. (of course, all of this is just my opinion, not really backed by any facts)

Define "right" because "Nature" does not differentiate between the two, unless you think Nature and God are one in the same and are sentient, but of course that goes against your religion.

What makes you say that, devilisk, have you ever studied mormon doctrine?

I'm not saying because I think it's wrong, I'm not even asking if people think it is wrong, I'm asking people who think it is fine if they think it is RIGHT, while they might not think it is necessarily WRONG, they might not believe that it is right.

Actually it is not, as I already explained to Moose, if people on this topic, such as Ex, who are bisexual think that while homosexual is not wrong, they don't find it right either, then it proves that in their nature they find being straight to be the right way, whether or not they listen to their natural instinct.