[Skybird]

In the end, it is ol' mother Nature herself being racist and discriminating humans, for women not having penisses and men not having boobs and the abiulity to give birth to children themselves. Nature is a bitch, let'S correct her.

To some people it does not seem to come to mind that Nature did very well in arran ging some things the way they are. Or in a less sentimental meaning: maybe the reproduction via a hetero-sexual race design has advantages that made it the superior path of evolutional design for certain species. And there can be no doub t that this is how it is for us humans. That makes the social consequences from that "natural", and the norm, the rule, the standard. It'S is not about morals so much. It is about naturalness, and the norm this defines for a race and a civilisation. Morals just come later, on the grounds of the natural standard. We favour the protection and interest of families and heterosexual couples, becasue of their importance for the community, a social importance and function that neither singles nor homosexual couples can show up with. We have taboos on incest, for the biological fact that there is a significant raise in chances for genetic defects if sisters and brothers lie together, anmd over conti8nuing generations. Like incest is a biological degeneration, the equalising of status between hom and hetereosedxual couples in the society's hierarchy of interest and protection priorities is a degenration of vital social core functions.

There is no reason and no excuse for discriminating or attacking homosexuals, nor is there such an excuse for doinmg the same with singles. But there is also no reason to see both as equal in importance to heterosexual couples. Any man doubting this should check if he can naturally get pregnant and give birth to children. Any woman doubting this should check if she can reproduce naturally with just another woman.

Sorry all you politically correct equality fanatics, but that is how our nature is. Live with it. Homosexuality= no chance for natural reproduction, no survival of the social community. Heterosexuality=chance of natural reproduction, chnace of survival of social community. Period.

Or would anyone argue that mankind should turn to invitro-fertilization and abandon the ways of nature? In Australia there is a couple suing the state for the right to designt he sex of their next baby, because they have had three girls, they now demand the right (!!!) to design a male embryo. This is were genetics and their potential benefit of discovering serious deseases early, turn into abuse, paving the way for designer-babies.

Do people want this as the future?

I am for genetic diagnostics. I am against genetic designing of babies.