AIDS is more easily transmitted by **** than ******l because of the blood.
That's because of the blood, if blood isn't present they there's not add risk. If the girl is on her period, theres blood right there, **** if you use their god damn tooth brush it could have blood. Point is the person I was quoting was saying that they don't take blood from gay people because they could have AIDS which is a retarded statement because like rufus said they check anyone donating blood.
That's because of the blood, if blood isn't present they there's not add risk. If the girl is on her period, theres blood right there, **** if you use their god damn tooth brush it could have blood. Point is the person I was quoting was saying that they don't take blood from gay people because they could have AIDS which is a retarded statement because like rufus said they check anyone donating blood.
and there is gay gene that makes people gay. Wouldn't be in this best interest to society to isolate the gay gene and make homosexuality obsolete as its counterproductive to the evolution and progression of our species?
Why do the work when homosexuals don't reproduce anyways? That is if there is a gay gene.
Or did you also forget that straight people have gay children from time to time?
What is the point of your post? If homosexuality has a purely genetic basis, then surrogate births have zero impact in the long run.
Then you go and attack the genetic basis of homosexuality in the same post.
I'm pretty sure being gay has nothing to do with genes, right? Not saying it's a choice, but being gay isn't a genetic mutation right?
Are we being overrun by a bunch of gay mutants?
Disregarding in utero environment, brain development, and societal and family influences; if there is a genetic basis, it is probably a product of interaction of many genes, not a specific mutation. This also explains why the numbers just do not follow mendelian or population genetic model predictions. Traits can still piggyback interacting genes even if it or its determinants are maladaptive. Sexuality is a complex phenotypic trait and we're not plants, so just the genes=phenotype paradigm is not applicable.
I'm pretty sure being gay has nothing to do with genes, right? Not saying it's a choice, but being gay isn't a genetic mutation right?
Are we being overrun by a bunch of gay mutants?
It's the future of the human race.
I think individual personalities are a complex combination of heritable and inheritable traits combined with environmental factors. It's probably just as inaccurate to say that there is a "gay gene" as it is to say that our sinister culture teaches people to be gay.
Anecdotally I can say that every gay person I know says that they knew they were gay from quite early on in childhood without any exposure to the "gay agenda".
There is nothing rational about a dikk in the anus, thats why grown man that partake in the acts have to wear diapers. Tell me a some benefits of homosexuality on society other than the lame population control theory?
The more men who are gay, the better. I learned this from living in SanFrancisco for a while. Having all those gay guys there helped me have sex with more women and I appreciate that very very much.
Memo to straight men: support gay rights, gay marriage and gay everything. These guys have decided to remove themselves from the "who gets to have sex with the women" competition. God Bless Them All.
Re: If people are really born gay..
