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

"The only objection they can raise to this is Biblical." Con misunderstood. "They" in this sentence does not refer to Con or to people making the born that way argument it refers to the anti-gay people. I am saying that once you make it about personal liberty there are no sound scientific arguments to be placed against homosexual behavior. Using "personal liberty" as the argument lays bare that the anti-gay side's entire argument against homosexuality relies on the Bible. For clarification this debate has nothing to do with whether or not homosexuality is a choice, this debate is about which line of argumentation should be preferred when arguing for gay rights. Have you ever seen someone raise the "Born that way" argument in a debate with an anti-gay conservative? They always argue "No, they're not." "No the evidence doesn't prove it." There a number of 'sources' such as NARTH where people can look and claim legitimacy it. No matter what you use to try to convince them it is easy for them to deny it and continue preaching that it's a choice. It would be better to reframe the issue, to not get stuck in debates about choice that will end with both sides remaining the same and anti-gay people who get convinced it's not a choice won't magically turn pro-gay they will demand gay people be celibate. Your arguments about why pedophilia and alcoholism are different are sound. However, the extreme anti-gay people who think the Bible should be the law won't care. If we don't waste our time debating choice (which is what antis expect and prepare for) and instantly catch them off guard by saying "The issue is not whether or not it is a choice. Religion is a choice but it is protected by laws against discrimination. The issue is that we are consenting adults who are harming no one." All they have then to make their argument is appeals to religion. Some people who were against gay rights on the grounds "it's gross" but also believe that laws based solely on religion shouldn't be enforced will finally put two and two together. Realizing the entire anti-gay rights argument hinges on the Bible they become pro-gay. And even for those not convinced the rest of the debate should delve into the other sins in the Bible such as why "mixed fabric clothing" is not considered a "moral law" in spite of those words not being found the Bible. Anti-gay preachers will say "it's not a moral law" in reference to that one and say that all the sexual-related ones are moral laws. This is based off of no distinction recorded in the Bible and you can point that out. Get your opponent to admit they think masturbation, straight married couples having anal or oral sex, and premarital sex will all get you sent to hell if you don't repent. At that point many people who may have been thinking of gays as being the "different" ones will think of the religious fanatics as the "different" ones pointing their fingers at the mainstream that enjoys a lot of things the religious right doesn't approve of. That way you can point out not only how anti-gay stances ultimately rest entirely on the Bible but that it is based on a selective interpretation of the Bible.