The post might as well be entitled with the simple assertion known to
philosophers throughout the ages that all human thought is the consequence of a
free will choice. That "thought" which is involuntary or otherwise
practically inaccessible is not thought. Thought is a higher level cognitive
function and as such it is something that is entirely within our ability to
control. To the degree that an individual can conceive of an idea, that idea is a
choice. Hence, all thought is the consequence of a choice. Human sexuality as
we understand it is one of those choices.
There is a political effort these days to obfuscate the choice of sexuality by giving it a status that is interchangeably a choice or an unchangeable state of nature
(alternatively dependent on the immediate political objective of the one
making the mutually exclusive assertions).
If sexuality were an unchangeable
state of nature, then no thought would be associated with it. Hence, the
ability to express oneself intellectually through sexuality would be an
absurdity. Rather, one reflects on unchangeable states of nature—they do not become it anymore than one becomes the clothes they wear.
On the other hand, if we accept that sexuality is a human choice, then we
must accept full responsibility for that choice. This responsibility is known
to us as "morality". Morality is simply the realization that we are responsible
for our thoughts and consequent actions. When this morality is internalized, we
call this "character". For good or bad, our character is the
expression of choice.
So, the next time that someone insists that sexuality be enshrined as a human right, our response should first be pity for their foolishness. It should not be to be the fool. Time permitting, you might refer them to this post should pity tend towards a desire for their intellectual rehabilitation.
Please note that there is one misunderstanding of
information that claims that what we think of free will is not free, but rather
the result of random complexity. This idea is easily refuted by remembering
that no deterministic system can innovate beyond its initial conditions and
structure. Random complexity in this meaning is still deterministic (such as
chaos). However, we conceive of new ideas in all scopes of our existence. While
our capacity for understanding may not be boundless, we innovate in directions
that almost surely can be associated with our presumption of causality. Thus,
for all intents and purposes and for none others, we think therefore we are
(causal autonomous learning agents) and have the imperative to
regulate ourselves morally.
