That's irrelevant to your point. Your argument assumes homosexuals exist, then proceeds to construct a hypothetical that in the end, attempts but fails to prove that there is something inherently undesirable about them. Similarly, I start by assuming that adoption exists, which it does, then go on to imitate the structure of your argument in a purposefully failed attempt to prove that adoption is inherently undesirable, using a similar hypothetical.
No it's not. Bringing up adoption trying to dispute my argument was foolish to begin with. Apples to oranges.
And says who? You? And what do you mean I assume they exist? You're questioning if homosexuality even exists? WTF?