So, I am trying to create an ethical argument based on rational principles, which I believe we can reach through logical thinking.

So I’d start with a little clarification on whether homosexuals are born or bred.
Determining whether something has a biological cause is difficult, and locating a specifically genetic link is even more so. The handful of studies that purportedly add up to incontestable “proof” that homosexuals are “born that way” are inconclusive at best and, as in some cases, such as the twins studies, the evidence strongly indicates that early environment is more likely the dominant factor to have produced homosexual desires.

Some people may be predisposed because of genetic, prenatal hormonal influences or other physical or brain differences to have personalities that make them vulnerable to the environmental factors that can elicit homosexual desires.

Young boys, for instance, who are not affirmed in their masculinity by a caring father, might be at risk for homosexuality. It’s not because of a homosexual “gene,” but because of an interrupted process of achieving secure gender identity. This can make some boys who crave male affirmation an easy mark for seduction into homosexuality. A similar pattern can be seen in girls who don’t fit classic gender profiles, need feminine affirmation, and are targeted by lesbians who play upon the girls’ emotional needs.
Differences in the brain structures of gay and straight individuals identified by researchers are not necessarily innate and may be the result of environmental or psychological factors and my conservative view is that all sexual deviance i.e. homosexuality, polyandry, bestiality, incest el al violate the natural order and shouldn’t be absolute rights.

An argument for incest would argue that you can’t deter two adults from having consensual sexand telling the woman that she can't become pregnant in that process and it will be argued that laws shouldn’t restrict individual liberty and privacy and that considered, it’s impossible to make a principled argument in favor of criminalizing incest without significantly overruling Lawrence vs. Texas, My point, one is as acceptable as the other.

The usual argument against bestiality is that animals cannot give consent, however they cannot consent to being eaten, forceful mating, sperm collected for artificial insemination etc. above yet society doesn't prevent them happening. They cannot consent to being taken for a walk any more than they can consent to having sex.
My point here is the law definitely protects each citizen’s civil rights and civil liberties as importantly as it is necessary to protect the health, welfare and safety of the society as a whole. who, by herself, cannot guarantee these freedoms.

There should be limits to rights; Legalization would be the mainstreaming of morally unacceptable vices in the society because one could argue from a point of view of that as long as you are not harming others, you can do what you please. The do no harm principle. In this case, one has to live in a society where a minute sect starts an agenda and its acceptance being enforced upon the whole. Say, promote incest, bestiality, polyandry etc.but morality is subjective, sowhy don’t we just enforce the do not harm principle? Then we ask,how much does it affect us? How much harm do they do than good?

I know that simply asking whether something must have a benefit or not basically ignores the rather prevalent attitude that homosexuals are born that way and in regards to getting their view accepted by mainstream society, they are very practiced at getting homosexuality to be included in movies, TV, and radio, etc. Undoubtedly they are promoting their lifestyle for a reason and I am sure that they are not promoting it because they think it is bad. They must be promoting it because they think is good. If something is good and worthy promoting, then shouldn't it have a real benefit to society? So, the question still stands. Does the lifestyle of homosexuality benefit society?

Homosexual behavior is linked with higher rates of promiscuity, physical disease, mental illness, substance abuse, child sexual abuse and domestic violence and all these things that impact society negatively.

Homosexuality is a sad and disillusioning lifestyle and this lifestyle is full of stressful moments hence, brings about the increased incidences of suicide among gay teenagers, the issues of isolation, discrimination and the cases of violence increase in the society, immorality and these Homosexuals pose a threat to people esp. children since the presence of homosexuals who do not exercise what is considered normalcy affects their morality and distorts the life continuity chain since the main aim of marriage is procreation.

So, from the standpoints of individual health, societal welfare, social order, religion and morality, participating in homosexual activity and its acceptance would be a stepping stone in allowing the rise for other vicesin the name of individual rights and liberty. Which mostly has proven to be more harmful than good to the society.
written by my very good friend.

Usman Aliyu Modibbo