/sci/ - Science & Math

>>1658890
>Yeah, what's your point op?

There isn't much of one; I intended this post for /r9k/ but they ignored it. I was just interested in what people would have to say on the topic. Also, I just wanted to test drive this explanation for why nobody should be worried about homosex. I figured /sci/ wouldn't be too bothered about the issue, but some people, even non-religious and non-homophobic people seem to get hung up on "sex is for making babbys which means gays are unnatural/aberrant/sickly". I thought that what I typed out in OP post is a pretty reasonable response to such claims.

>>1659136
True dat, Anonymous.