Just wait till prenatal tests can determine a "gay gene". Would aborting be acceptable to ultra-right evangelicals in that case?

I came here to say approximately the same thing, Raindrop. lol.

Not to mention there probably are medical reasons to abort a fetus depending on sex. I'm going to go look up sex-linked diseases. I'll be right back.

Aren't there cases where a fetus of one specific sex would be aborted due to some serious sex-chromosome-related defect? A girl child would be unaffected, or at worst, a carrier, but a boy would have the affliction, and might not even survive birth? It's not always about just wanting a boy.

@2: we were posting the same thought at the same time :)

Yep, sometimes if the fetus is a boy there is a 100% chance he has a very serious disease, like muscular dystrophy. But, sex-selection in those cases is always now done pre-implantation.
https://www.genderselectionauthority.com…
I see there is a disease provision in the bill.

@4, :-)

A woman should be able to get an abortion for whatever reason you want, including the gender. It's the woman's call.

(Granted, getting an abortion based on gender sort of makes you a jerk, but the country was built by jerks)

A doctor does not " commit" an abortion.

It makes you a big-time jerk. But it still doesn't require legislation. Such legislation, anyway, is just an excuse to further limit abortion rights.

And where is the provision for race btw? Like, if your White teenage daughter makes a "mistake" with a Black teenage boy? I'm sure you just as badly want to protect the life of that embarrassing little mixed-race fetus, right? (Sorry to sound so pessimistic...there used to be an abortion clinic by my house in Louisiana, and the white protesters couldn't be bothered to heckle the Black patients that came in. Like, shrug, one less Black child born... "so what").

Mike Padden sure looks a lot like Dopey.

These "representatives" are perverts. I hate to imagine what they think about in the dark lonely night.

Is there really a problem they are trying to solve? If the representatives can do anything useful can they at least run in place when they are in session? At least I would feel like they accomplished something.

#13:

If nothing else we could install treadmills on the floor of State House & Senate and they could power the lights for awhile; that alone would probably save the State thousands of dollars in electricity bills every session.

Can't we just wipe out the obnoxious mixed GOP-Tea Party gene altogether and be done with them?
@13 & @14: I like your thinking. We could stick all GOP Senators, Lobbyists, and Misrepresentatives underground in Olympia, where they could fire up the steam tunnels just by opening their stupid mouths. Imagine all the money saved with the use of wind power.

Miloscia is a horrible fundamentalist Catholic POS. But then as a Republican, he's not unusual.

Oh my. Natural selection and it's relationship to genetics is a bit more complicated than that. For one thing, many genes persist in a population even if they lead to fewer offspring. Also, gay birds have as many offspring as heterosexual birds, yo. (http://www.livescience.com/11125-birds-g…)
There does seem to be ample evidence from human and non-human animals that homosexuality is beneficial to a population, and that some homosexual genes lead to increased fitness for both populations and individuals.
Lets start with the evidence that it has a (partly) genetic basis. Twin studies show that genetics plays a role, but also prenatal factors that affect brain development. This will get you started. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/84944… Note that twins who share a womb are more likely to both be gay than the general population of siblings, but twins who also share a genome are more than twice as likely again!
Now as to why the gene for homosexuality persists? There are a couple of theories. One is the "good uncle/aunt" theory that in times of extreme hardship, it might take two people, and their siblings to raise a child. During such times, if you are not inclined to reproduce, you may be at an advantage; you can help to raise your brother's child, and pass on 1/4 of your genes (including the one for homosexuality) rather than no genes if you had your own children with no outside help.
Another theory is the heterozygous advantage theory. This is similar to the sickle-cell gene and malaria resistance. (Very) simply put: bisexuals are hornier. http://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-ani… Or sometimes having half a gay gene means you have more sex of all kinds. Bonobos are mostly bisexual and they seem to breed pretty well. The individuals who have sex with both males and females may all be heterozygous at the gay locus, meaning those genes persist at high rates in the population, despite potentially producing up to 1/4 purely homosexual individuals. Also, lots of other stuff...Let me know if you have any questions.