Sohail:

 So far from all of this I get:

 1) The author states that homosexuals should not be allowed to adopt  children as it would leave the child without either a mother or a  father. Having two of one (either mother or father) but not one of the  other "isn't fair". Question: Do we then take children away from a  bereaved parent? The same noxious reasoning would apply...

 2) The author suggests that homosexuality is "most likely some kind of  physical disorder of the brain". But, by his own admission, he doesn't
 have any proof of this...

 So what we have so far is one unproven, negative, perhaps libelous, allegation concerning what some would suggest is 20% of society and one
 idea that we should punish children who don't have a father or a mother.
 Or is it punish the parent(s)?

 The discussion point of a lack of scientific justification or physical  test for this syndrome or that disorder is unclear and evading me. I get  the feeling that the author is saying that since he does not know on  what basis a diagnosis is made that he can then point to his own  ignorance and say that his point is supported as there isn't evidence  for it either. But I repeat, it's evading me.

 The addition at the end of an example of what I would otherwise call a  social injustice (certainly not a reasoned scientific finding) feels  like an emotional last gasp and not a reasoned point.

 But it's your website...

 Steve