There's no doubt that the biological argument "works," at least in the present political climate. Support for civil rights for GLBs is highly correlated with belief that sexual orientation is biological/genetic, and having one or more close GLB friends or family members (and those two things are also correlated with each other).
But, at least so far, the science is not there to definitively back up the claims. In fact, most scientists seem to agree the best guess is sexual orientation stems from a combination of biological and social factors. Of course, "social factors" do not necessarily imply choice either. Race has "real" effects because of social factors, not biological ones (geneticists and anthropologists tell us), but few would assert those social factors constitute a choice. OTOH, as you say, it should bascially come down to other people not interfering in the lives of people who are not harming anyone, and so choice should not be an issue.
no subject
But, at least so far, the science is not there to definitively back up the claims. In fact, most scientists seem to agree the best guess is sexual orientation stems from a combination of biological and social factors. Of course, "social factors" do not necessarily imply choice either. Race has "real" effects because of social factors, not biological ones (geneticists and anthropologists tell us), but few would assert those social factors constitute a choice. OTOH, as you say, it should bascially come down to other people not interfering in the lives of people who are not harming anyone, and so choice should not be an issue.