"Born That Way" Is A Poor Argument In Favor of Gay Rights Compared to Personal Liberty Arguments

I am a libertarian by nature but I am under the impression that it is an inferior reason for gay rights. It might harm none (in cases where the penis happens to not be big enough to rip apart the guy's arse, or the girl's strap-on doing the same to another girl) but I would like to highlight why being born as something is a far deeper reason to stop something than mere libertarian ideology.First of all, why did the blacks feel the need to fight oppression? Surely they didn't care as much about the freedom to be black as much as the understanding that they are merely human beings born with a few different chromosomes to Caucasians and other races. Surely it was the very understanding that both a white and black human are born that way and that neither could change the colour of their skin but only what they did with their body that drove Martin Luther King to persevere with the Civil Rights' Movement as well as Malcolm X with his more violent forms of protest. Surely the reason feminists began fighting oppression not because they wanted the freedom to be female but because they realised they were born that way and everyone should realise you can't help that. The very philosophy of feminism is that men and women are both equal beings but trapped into a body which makes one appear destined to be good at something they are not. Surely the motivation behind Gay Rights begins with the very idea that from the birth of that person, they were unable to prevent the homosexuality occurring and thus should be allowed to be who they are. Surely being born as something, or being born to do something, is the single most fundamental reason for protests throughout history. Thus, my point in short is that the fundamental cause to even fight for gay rights originates from the feeling (and now almost scientifically valid proof) that you are born into the world destined to love people of your own gender whilst others oppress you for who you are.Secondly, I shall both rebut your point regarding paedophilia and alcoholism whilst raising a point regarding what a person should fight for in the first place. A paedophile might be born to find children more attractive than mature human beings, they might even take this up as a reason to fight for their right to molest children. However, the argument that the children were not born to be molested nor to find older people sexually attractive prior to puberty is a stronger argument, thus it renders it futile, it again comes down to what one is born to do. Alcoholism is something with which some people are born to resist better than others, however a person is not born with resistance or vulnerability to turn homosexual, instead they are born to eventually realise their sexuality as homosexual. A resistance gene cannot be compared to an unchangeable set of genes which completely reconfigure one's mind and sexuality. The point I would like to raise that whilst it's simplistic to see that one is born to be gay it's also a key point that their potential partner was also born to be gay and that unlike paedophilia, this is two people's birth right being fought for.On a final note, You stated that the only objections I could raise are biblical, so I shall now raise some scientific facts. To begin with, a pair of scientists named Blanchard and Klassen (1997) reported that each older brother increases the odds of a man being gay by 33%.[1] A number of sections of the brain have been reported to be sexually dimorphic; that is, they vary between men and women. There have also been reports of variations in brain structure corresponding to sexual orientation. In 1990, Swaab and Hofman reported a difference in the size of the suprachiasmatic nucleus between homosexual and heterosexual men[2]. In 1992, Allen and Gorski reported a difference related to sexual orientation in the size of the anterior commissure[3]. Just a few thoughts about the science behind the claim not being biblical.In conclusion, the theory that people are born gay is definitely based on more than just biblical reference, even atheist gays state it from their own experience. Also, the fundamental motivational factor behind most revolutionary protests has often been due to people being born a certain way or to be a certain type of person. Also, the liberty argument regarding harmful sexualities and alcoholism are irrelevant to the debate for paedophilia involves a party that wasn't born to be that way and alcoholism relates to resistance, not to an entire reconfiguring of one's sexuality.Sources:[1] http://www.nytimes.com... [2] http://www.sciencedirect.com... <-- note that you probably have to pay for it.[3] http://www.pnas.org... <-- best source in my opinion