They do it because they love the pleasure of homosexual sex, thats why they do it, not because of some fake sexual "orientation".
That is not entirely correct.
Love of pleasure is certainly the usual motivation for people to have sex, but
who they have sex with is often guided by who they're attracted to.
You don't really have a choice about who you're attracted to; it's pretty reflexive. I mean, I suppose with sufficient conditioning (perhaps intense and long-term), you could train your body to be attracted to pretty much anything, but you still had an innate set of tastes to begin with.
For some people, this built-in set of preferences favors those of the same sex. I can't link to evidence of this, but I know for a fact that it's true for at least one person (me). In some cases the trend of being turned on by those of the same rather than opposite sex is consistant enough that it could reasonably be called a "sexual orientation."
Now, of course, whether one
acts on such desires is entirely a matter of choice. But the fact remains that some people do have an innate predisposition to be attracted to those of the same sex, and that is not a matter of choice or invention.
As for the larger issues of the thread, I'll say again that gay marriage is so unprecedended among the various incarnations of that ancient tradition that I'm leery of it. I'm all for the intervention of the courts to keep things constitutionally honest, but it isn't clear to me that that's what's happening here. Whether marriage even
can include homosexual couples depends on what marriage
is (i.e., whether the "man and woman" bit is actually a part of the
definition of marriage), and that sort of defining seems far more fitting to the legislature than the judiciary, in the absence of a clear stance in the Constitution (which is silent about marriage).
