[donh]

Look, these arguments are based on a situation that did not breed homosexuality, namely the current condition. These current conditions are anomolous peaks in ice sheet recession--they don't last nearly as long as precessions, and when the ice is back resources are scarce, scarce, scarce--just the sorts of conditions that produce homosexuality in street kids. Homosexuality exists because, dispite all that statistically vetted misery you guys are dishing out, it's better bet than starving alone, or letting your tribe all starve together. If it hadn't had its uses it wouldn't exist, nature is parsimoneous that way.

If you want to argue with me, you'd be better served to try to show why my arguments are incorrect. Making up arguments to attribute to me so you can soundly refute them is pointless. I don't give a tinker's poop about "defending the homosexual lifestyle"--so knock it off, you are wasting your time and my bandwidth.

[tuesday afternoon]

Look, these arguments are based on a situation that did not breed homosexuality, namely the current condition.

But these arguments do show that homosexuality is associated with incredibly high incidences of sexually-transmitted disease, promiscuity, physical violence, and emotional problems. It may be a coping mechanism but so is alcoholism.

If it hadn't had its uses it wouldn't exist, nature is parsimoneous that way.

What uses do alcoholism, drug abuse, pedophilia, bestiality have? Your argument that homosexuality exists to parse out scarce resources makes no sense given the miniscule portion of the population in which it exists. Science has found no biological etiology, pointing more toward environmental/behavioral factors, such as abuse.

If you want to argue with me, you'd be better served to try to show why my arguments are incorrect.

I did. You didn't answer my question as to when the "separation of rear openings" occurred; presumably because you have no answer.