As far as I can tell, the pathogen hypothesis makes the most sense. I obviously don't believe there is some "gay bug," but it could very well be some kind of virus that rewires the brain, similarly to what toxo does. I guess the next step would be to figure out if it can be contagious. And that's pretty much it. I just want to know more before I can decide if gays should be allowed to adopt kids.
Can I ask what basis you have for believing it is pathogenic and contagious? I am not a medical doctor, but I am in the medical field and pathogens are insidious in nature, which manifest in illnesses with physical signs and measurable lab values. By contagious, do you think a gay person can cough or something similar, thus spreading their homosexuality? And if so, why would this only affect any potential children that would be adopted? Why wouldn't it affect anyone, to include adults who come in contact with a homosexual. You say you don't believe there is a "gay bug", but what do you think a pathogen is? By definition, a gay pathogen would be a "bug" because a pathogen is a virus, bacterium or fungus. So, you think homosexuality is a disease, from what I am gathering. Also, pathogens tend to be very insidious, getting increasingly worse in the host without treatment.
The hypothesis you present is suggesting there is a gay bug. In fact, what you're presenting might as well just put gay people right back in milieu of the 1950's and prior:
-Protect the kids from the homosexuals!
-Don't let the kids around their gay uncle!
-Maybe gays shouldn't be allowed to be teachers!
And to quote you again, "I just want to know more before I can decide if gays should be allowed to adopt kids." So, you think you should decide on other peoples families?
I am backing out of this thread. This is ridiculous and insulting. This is an argument that sounds like one that would come from someone 100 years ago.