To: ThirstyMan
Any "genetic" link would have extinguished itself long ago according to Darwin's theory. I mean if you don't get into the gene pool you're extinguished in one generation. Don't they get it? It's their theory after all...can't have it both ways.*snort* Our 17 yr old daughter made a similar comment the other day. If it's truly genetic, how can that gene possibly be passed on if homosexuals don't reproduce?
150 posted on
01/15/2006 5:27:44 PM PST by
SuziQ
To: SuziQ
Our 17 yr old daughter made a similar comment the other day. If it's truly genetic, how can that gene possibly be passed on if homosexuals don't reproduce?So obvious, I'm embarassed I didn't think of it. I'll be using this one a lot.
158 posted on
01/15/2006 5:47:21 PM PST by
ez
("Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton)
To: SuziQ
Hi SuziQ,
I think your daughter is brilliant, obviously...and I'd like to know the answer to "our" question, wouldn't you?
Thirsty
165 posted on
01/15/2006 6:52:28 PM PST by
ThirstyMan
(hysteria: the elixir of the Left that trumps all reason)
To: SuziQ
A follow up thought:
The Gay gene should be as common as the Shaker gene wouldn't you say?
166 posted on
01/15/2006 6:57:11 PM PST by
ThirstyMan
(hysteria: the elixir of the Left that trumps all reason)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson