It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I would rather our species to procreate, rather than be dead weight in the gene pool.
Maybe some gays do not want to be gay. Are you saying that we should keep them trapped, forcing them to like the wrong sex?
reply to post by TheLotLizard
I love it when people post extremely long things that lose my interest in the first sentence.
Four paragraphs is extremely long?
Until then your opinion is as good as mine. I would rather our species to procreate, rather than be dead weight in the gene pool.
You think homosexuals are a species now? Not just diseased? Us and them.
But if you want to go ahead I'm sure the world will praise you as a hero...
In long term views as a species. Who do you think will last longer?
Maybe if you tried a little harder to get your thoughts across it would be different. Sometimes it takes more than a line or two. Sometimes it takes a paragraph or four.
I never said we are two separate species. Said what lineage will last longer. I'm done talking about this subject as all that's happening is getting my words changed around.
This is why I've never respected your posts. Nor ever will.
Actually, it's a rather recent development in man's written history to not do your duty by your lineage and procreate. (Anything older than that, is, of course, literally guesswork.) I mean, heck, even the Greeks and Romans still took wives when homosexual.
You almost might want to consider more carefully what you say. There really isn't much in the way of a homosexual lineage. Think about that idea for a moment.
Tell it to a shrew, rabbit or cow. I don't think they have a high sense of art or the meaning of their lives. Other than "look, grass!"
eta: the biological definition of life is basically "that which eats, craps and screws".