Quote Originally Posted by LemmingKingXXX View Post
I would argue that while a fundamental shift in a personal belief system isn't taken on whimsy, it's a hell of a lot easier to accomplish than actively fighting against a biological urge fueled by naturally produced mind controlling drugs. You learn (and unlearn) religion, no one is born with the base line beliefs and/or dogmatic knowledge. Taking a step back from religion, you can look at the societal norms that aren't based on biological imperatives. Anyone who's raised a 3-year-old will tell you that we aren't born with modesty in either speech or appearance, just as no one is born a patriot (or an anarchist). Granted, it's a lot easier to teach a child to put on pants and not scream at people all the time than it is to make the transition from theist to atheist, but you can't unlearn hunger, thirst or the need for oxygen (you can only be born with or without them).
Why do you think the "it's a choice" argument is so popular for opponents of homosexuality? If sexuality is a choice, then - like religion - you can be taught to act in one way or another, and you can be punished for a wrong choice if it is against the law. If sexuality isn't a choice, however; the waters become far more murky, not only can you not teach someone to be sexual one way or another and have it stick without any long term psychological ramifications should it go against their nature, but passing laws against fundamental sexuality (not overt private/public sexual behavior) are no different than the Jim Crow laws of late 1800's early 1900's USA (or Apartheid etc.).
tl;dr (if you really want one): fundamental beliefs vs biological urges = apples vs oranges
PS: I don't like boys, boys are yucky
Sexual urges aren't may not be a choice, but sexual activity certainly is.

If not, society would have no standing by which to punish rapists, peeping toms, child molesters, etc.