Gay philosopher, journalist and professor John Corvino, however, took a different, more convoluted and potentially politically disastrous route.
In a piece originally published at 365 Gay, but reprinted at Independent Gay Forum, Corvino, an ethics professor, writes:
The question â€œIs it a choice or biological?â€ involves gross oversimplification. Homosexuality is both, and neither, depending on what one means.
Although we donâ€™t choose our romantic feelings, homosexuality (like heterosexuality) certainly involves choicesâ€”about whether and how and with whom to express those feelings. When Richardson said â€œitâ€™s a choice,â€ he probably meant that we have the right to make such choices. Good for him.
At the same time, homosexuality (like heterosexuality) surely has biological underpinnings. Weâ€™re flesh-and-blood creatures. At some level, everything about us is biological, regardless of what causal story about sexual orientation one accepts.
But donâ€™t we need to prove weâ€™re â€œborn this wayâ€ to show that homosexuality is â€œnaturalâ€? Not at all. I wasnâ€™t born speaking English, or practicing religion, or writing columnsâ€”yet none of these is â€œunnaturalâ€ in any morally relevant sense.
We’re absolutely speechless. We trust you lot have something to say.