Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxll.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!whuxlb!pyuxll!pjm
From: pjm@pyuxll.UUCP (PJ Maioriello)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: gay response response
Message-ID: <406@pyuxll.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 29-Aug-83 13:50:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxll.406
Posted: Mon Aug 29 13:50:07 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Aug-83 09:47:14 EDT
References: <622@hou5d.UUCP>, <3179@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: American Bell, South Plainfield NJ
Lines: 26


It seems a little weird to talk about genes as if they are
some sort of inatimate objects.  In addition when weighing the
relative merits of homo sexuality versus hetero sexuality with
respect to evolution, I think the point is moot.  Evolution occurs
over generations.  The next generation comes to exist via a
a process that is about as hetero sexual as you can get!
(sounds rather clinical doesnt it)

Anyway, when it comes to genes, these little buggers are
supposed to be contained on chromosomes half of which come from
each partner in a decidedly hetero (again) encounter.  This
half each is what diversifies gene pools and allows the
evolutionary process to take place.


What does all this mean??

If homosexuality means anything to the human evolutionary process,
it's meaning is surely dwarfed when compared to heterosexuality.

Maybe this is obvious, but I thought I'd say it anyway


				Paul Maioriello
				pyuxll!pjm