81.bb.dnainternet.fi> 4282b4da   
   XPost: rec.audio.opinion, alt.religion.scientology   
   From: spam@spam.com   
      
   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.   
      
   You don't need it to be "never". More rarely work quite nicely in   
   evolution.   
      
   d   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)