81.bb.dnainternet.fi> d28b5cfa   
   XPost: rec.audio.opinion, alt.religion.scientology   
   From: jennconductsREMOVETHIS@mac.com   
      
   In article <9htd76lulep5ob2l6fibsbgjout0d2271l@4ax.com>,   
    flipper  wrote:   
      
   > On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:41:47 -0700, Jenn   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   > >In article <4c76d51a.153638770@news.eternal-september.org>,   
   > > spam@spam.com (Don Pearce) wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:47:42 +0100, Eeyore   
   > >>  wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >> >Soundhaspriority ( the real one ? )wrote:   
   > >> >>   
   > >> >> Even worse, we shouldn't have a system where people with defective   
   genes   
   > >> >> (the homos) are reproducing using these defective genes by artificial   
   > >> >> means,   
   > >> >> or otherwise.   
   > >> >   
   > >> >I know there's a 'redhead gene' but one for homosexuality ? How about   
   > >> >bisexuals too ? False argument methinks.   
   > >> >   
   > >> >Graham   
   > >>   
   > >> A gene for homosexuality would disappear from the pool pretty quickly,   
   > >> one would imagine. A bit like a gene for infertility.   
   > >>   
   > >> d   
   > >   
   > >That might be true if gay people never parented children.   
   >   
   > Not really because it could be recessive.   
      
   True.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)