I have read both Plato's "Republic," and Huxley's "Brave New World," GfS, and likening what I described to the society Huxley postulated is reaching for it. How do you feel about a childless heterosexual couple who does the same sort of thing?

I know of such a couple who were both fertile, but the woman was unable, due to a physical abnormality, to carry to term. So an egg harvested from the woman was fertilized in vitro, then implanted in the uterus of a woman who volunteered to be a surrogate mother (for a fee, incidentally). Essentially the same procedure as I described above (except that the woman did not charge them a fee).

Is there anything "Huxleyan" about this? Or is that only if it's done by same sex couples?

These days fertility clinics can offer a number of options that one could characterize as Huxleyan. But that doesn't really mean that society is going to collapse.

####

And Ake, you seem to imply that HIV/AIDS was invented by homosexual men.

". . . would you please explain why, in every country where AIDS was diagnosed it first showed up amongst the homosexual community?"

Simple, Ake. It's not true.

The history of HIV/AIDS:   CLICKY.   Although I'm quite sure you will blow this off because it disagrees with what you want to believe.

Transmission of HIV virus (I would consider the Center for Disease Control a fairly reliable and unbiased source of information, wouldn't you?).

Other CDC data:

Males accounted for 74% of the population living with HIV. The largest population living with HIV (45%) comprised men who have sex with men (MSM), followed by persons infected through high-risk heterosexual contact (27%), those infected through injection drug use (22%), and those who were exposed through both male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use (5%).

Still more HERE

Although immunodeficiency diseases of one sort or another have been around for as long as humans have, the HIV/AIDS was first identified in the United States in 1981 in a small group of homosexual males. Saying that this is a "gay disease" is a bit like blaming polio on children who like to swim because the first cases identified in the polio epidemic in the summer 1916 were kids who contracted the virus while swimming at public beaches (when I contracted polio at the age of 2, I hadn't been anywhere near a swimming beach, or other children who had).

No, the association is simply a matter of happenstance, and is used as a handy weapon against gays.

And Little Hawk—have you ever taken a strong stance on a moral or ethical issue, or is "colorless neutrality" your permanent posture on everything? Ever read the statement made by Pastor Martin Niemoller back in the 1930s? If not, look it up and read it. If you have, read it again.

Don Firth