Question Illustrated by a Hypothetical Problem

When the
* Black Holes of Reason *
hear or read the reasonable arguments for not having a continuous population explosion FORCED by religion, WHAT HAPPENS to the REASONING which is never heard from again after it enters their precious "noggins?"

Posing a hypothetical problem
Two men live together. They both prefer women,
therefore are suspected of being lesbian. Anyway,
they argue that freedom of choice ought to be granted to intelligent persons who have a reasonably good work ethic and don't engage in highly risky behavior. They make the argument that present population growth rates are creating an expectation of ecological calamities. But when they have made their argument, the response comes back from some of our world's

* Black Holes of Reason *

that everyone must approximate procreative configuration in their intimacies, because ...well, just because. You can see their point. There is a certain charm in it for most of us.
Still, ALTHOUGH intelligent lesbians can actually bear and raise sccessful children, thereby raising the average intelligence (that part of the equation which is genetic), the

* Black Holes of Reason *

insist that such persons must be denied many of the benefits of the U.S. Constitution...Why?
Well, of course, because their religious beliefs are different.. you know...the religious "no freedom" clause which

* Black Holes of Reason *

read into our Constitution.

So, repeating....when they hear or read the reasonable arguments for not having a continuous population explosion FORCED by religion, WHAT HAPPENS to the REASONING which is never heard from again after it enters their precious "noggins?"

• In This Great F*T*RE - something - February 11, 2002 - 05:40 UTC
• Of course, "religion" should be defined empirically - something - February 11, 2002 - 05:46 UTC
• related questions - something - February 11, 2002 - 15:31 UTC