Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but it occurs to me that because practicing homosexuals don’t breed, the are spared the expense of having to pay for college for their children. That gives them a lot of discretionary income to cause a lot of political mischief. How massive a threat to this nation this reality is and what can be done about it I throw out for discussion.
How is it you think those people got to be called "queers".
The malady of desires for sexual perversion is more likely to be seen among outwardly bright people, too. Their ability to imagine can bring earthly benefits (and people like Albert Einstein and Werner Von Braun, who as far as we know were straight) but can also outstrip their physiological readiness. Some have said that the line between genius and madness is exceedingly fine.
The first time I heard the term, “DINK’s (Double Income, No Kids) it was a fagula that said it.
Well in the sense of reproduction, lesbians are infamous for taking donated sperm, and homosexual men, well, they can adopt. However, the convenience part could be especially true for homosexual men adopting, as they can choose a convenient time to adopt instead of having a concern about when menopause can hit, as should be a woman’s concern.
However, it is true that treatment for narcotic addictions is disproportionate to homosexual men, and alcohol abuse problems (health and behavior) is disproportionate to lesbians. As far as behavior is concerned, the disproportionate share of syphillis, AIDs, and irritable bowel syndrome is disproportionate to homosexual men, the results speak suggestions about behavior. Although the more discrete, and less-active homosexuals likely fare better, although it is tough to sample them because they don’t wish to be notorious for whatever reason.
Oh, don’t kid yourself. They breed. Either by intercourse with the opposite sex, the turkey baster, or adoption.