I do not intend this as a polemic. I am merely pointing out what seems to me to be a logical inconsistency with those who hold to a different worldview than my own.
If homosexuality is a genetic predisposition, it would seem that it is one from the standpoint of Darwinian evolution that would naturally diminish in the gene pool (since those who have it cannot naturally reproduce and thus spread the genetic variation). However, due to advancements in the field of fertility (or arrangements utilizing the natural means of reproduction), individuals with this genetic variance can, in fact, spread this variance in the gene pool through reproduction. Granted, this is a rebellion against natural selection, but we've been doing that for years in our work to save endangered species (which I do not oppose - but then again, I'm not a Darwinian evolutionist). If "fittest" means those most able to naturally propagate the species, we are currently working hard to ensure that nonviable genetic variations do, in fact, spread. Are we are determined to de-evolve?
This would seem to be a logical inconsistency.
On the other hand, from my worldview, this is pretty clear. It would seem that those who did away with God with their theory couldn't escape their rebellious nature. Darwinian evolution became their god, and now, true to fallen human nature, they are rebelling against that god, as well.