It's a lot like race, in fact, and like class--the poor having too many kids. It's not blacks, I'm not a racist, it's those uppity blacks who don't know their place, always trying to get attention. It certainly sounds a whole lot like that.

   Suppose the "agenda" of "gay culture" (you don't mean Greek philosophy and Socratic dialogues I take it) might be to promote acceptance for gays so that those children everyone is worried about don't suffer so much? How patronising is the whole poor-child rigamarole? When exactly are we going to get around to finding out more about this condition that's been around since the roots of western culture began? And as I already wondered, Will we be using the pathologies of hetero orientation as a control group? Anyhow, I'm sure gays will be waiting by the phone.

It seems unnatural, doesn't work right, the whole naturey pc bullshit thing, but then if we're going to be natural, can we get remorseless murder back, like the blessed critters? Wait, which direction are we going again? Lead us there o' spiritual nature people.

I'd rather anybody said they thought homosexuality was wrong and immoral, if that's where all their curlicues and spun lines lead. Talk about pc. You can think that. But you may also think that marrying for money, having a child in dubious other hetero circumstances are wrong--after all, gays can marry and have kids, as long as it's a big sham, nice. Law can't proscribe all these matters, if you think about it. And it shouldn't. The culture agenda may annoy you, but you'll be pleased to know, for the sake of the poor children, that it is working. Opinion splits largely along age.