After all, they're already on record claiming that homosexuals make "better parents" than biological moms and dads.
Call me when they can reproduce in Same-Sex pairs without any outside help. Then I’ll be impressed...
gay people evolve through binary fission.
The faggots may dismiss this article as snark, but why would a major homo publication in a large city allow such to be published? It leads to a pretty damning conclusion that they actually believe in such eugenics.
Wouldn’t it be great if we were all gay? *sigh*
No life form that is incapable of reproduction is a “higher form of evolution.” Nor can they survive as a life form.
So this evolution thingy...natural selection to some...it allows organisms that cannot reproduce to survive? Amazing. I’d love to see the science behind that whopper.
The article is porn. IT is that simple.
Most homosexuals were sexually molested as children.
They peddle this nonsense in an attempt to normalize their behavior and attain easier access to SEXUALLY MOLEST YOUR CHILDREN.
The homo media - is there any other kind in America?
Because they immediately go extinct?
How can a group, who by definition can’t reproduce, could evolve?
First thought that comes to my mind after reading this?
“Wow! What a mega-vain ego-maniac!”
His inspiration must be the Greek God of Narcissus.
According to the fable, (subtitle; portrait of an empty life).
Narcissus was walking by a lake and decided to drink some water. He was surprised and deeply impressed by his reflection. He became entranced by that floating image, and upset knowing the image could never be fully obtained.
Narcissus withered and died at the river bank, still mournful that he could never attain the true object of his desire.
The article is all over the place. The author attributes art, beauty, culture etc. to gays. Then he asserts that gayness is a genetic trait, acknowledges that as a genetic trait, gays would ordinarily be extinct due to their supposed 20 percent rate of reproduction (He says 80% don’t have children). But he says there’s a theory that the gene expression for gayness is only “turned on” in times of survival stress (epigenesis). So I am trying to figure out how their contributions to art, culture, and beauty contribute to survival and how even decadent societies (Rome) have histories of extensive gay populations (what triggers gay gene expression in decadent socieities?).
Just imagine a white person writing an article like this one, but instead of sexuality (which he attributes to genetics), asserting that another genetic attribute (skin color?) means one is superior and listing specifics of superiority. Minorities would be offended and the rational among us would point out it’s the content of your character that counts, not your gene expression.
Truly this article smacks of “master race” thinking. How backward, narcissistic and malevolent, especially given the author purports to be among our “betters.”
With only gays, there’d be no evolution!
,,,,, if they’re so smart how come they can’t propagate as a couple ,, lots of other hetero couples have no problem figuring it out .
Putting ones primary sexual organ into the opening at the end of the alimentary canal through which solid waste matter leaves the body is not a higher form of evolution.
Yes of course because nature is always working to end itself - Go away morons.