In a homosexual world, women will be enslaved to become breeders like dogs in a pet shop
i had sought to avoid this topic, but in a free society, I am compelled to share this insight.
I will not make the usual diplomatic homilies to the homosexuals, - gays and lesbians - whom I view as only my fellow humans, but to be
straightforward, and forthright and even to a degree of bluntness which is not my way on ATS, but only for the sake of reality and discussion.
In a world where homosexuality becomes the norm, the only natural evolution would be that all female children will be bred as breeders for new
children, like female dogs in pet shops. Is this what we want for our women folk for their future?
Homosexuals DO NOT produce children on their own, and thus the need for outside agencies for childbirth, if homosexuality is to be ECONOMICALLY
sustainable. Without future generations, WHO will look after the old homosexuals when they get on with age? WHO will gather the grains and work the
Japan, with its aging population, proved that without the regenerations of children, it will only soon die out as its economy collapses one day.
China, with its one child policy, realizes this and had woken up, in fear of what is to come.
Today, 14 countries in our world legalized same sex marriage and even allowed adoption and IVF techniques for childbirth.
Homosexuals claimed that they are only a MINORITY in our world, and will remain a minority. But the FACT is - there are a minority because their union
were not legalised nor allowed to adopt children which will only be subjected to ridicle when they grow up in a still heterogenous world today and
suffer even more dire teenage identity angst common even with normal children.
Once the sacred marriage of institution, passed down by our ancestors for thousands of years to include homosexuality, their numbers will be more,
more so when there is so much conflict, confusion, stress and even gender role confusions which makes same sex companionship a likely choice as such
couples would have gone through much in such a life going through woes and suffering together, even sharing beds and toilets comfortably since young,
that it becomes natural.
But when more of humans go for same sex marriages, the consequences will lead to a massive drop in childbirths, revenues to state, higher costs of
production and health, and downright the end of the economy, if not humanity later.
And in order to stop this trend, WOMEN will be seen more as economic resource than as a human, to be given IVF as long as they are capable of
childbirth, like dogs, and most of them will come initially from the poor, then to the middleclasses by the elites as humankind gets lesser and
No more will women have the choice or say over childbirth matters, to love and grow the child to be a responsible member of the human race as our
society had taught us, but have their babies ripped away the moment she concieves.
In the past when most of mankind was poor, women were treated as such. But as we progressed, and many uplifted to middleclasses, 2 is enough as
replacement and we worry for women who gives birth to more than that, even if out of love for her husband and kids, as any civilised and progressive
society would for its members.
In a homsexual world, our womenfolk will be treated horrifyingly, like breeding dogs and have their children taken away the moment of birth, and cries
ignored. New humans will be nothing more than robots to serve a needs of the homosexuals and its elites
I am no religious fundamentalist, and had often questioned why some principles are there in religion. And over this matter, I realized why. Religion
is nothing more than moral and ethical guidelines for mankind if it seeks to progress and evolve. Homosexuality does not evolve humans for it
IVF is wonderful science for childless heterosexual couples. But if done on a massive scale, it is a horror, to us men and future women. It must NOT
be allowed for homosexual couples. We this generation have an ethical responsibility to stop it, either through legislation or the Courts.
Some say marriage is a union between man and women, understand and adopted since time immemorial and is a given. But some attempted to abuse the rule
of law by challenging that no where in the constitution does it says only a man can marry a woman.
For them, I can only say:- nowhere does the constitution says a human cannot marry his/her best friend - dogs or donkeys. Do we mankind want to
unethically create horrendous INTERSPECIES of hybrids through the manipulaton of DNA?
I appeal to my fellow humans of the homosexuality bend whom I will NEVER discrimate or allow others to do so as long as they live - if legality and
protection of rights you seek, there is nothing wrong with civil unions.
edit on 25-4-2013 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)