That's no reason to view homosexuality as pathological (the way some cultures view it). "Adequate population" might also mean at the tribal or village level, i.e. "a full krew."
I posted some more thoughts along these lines (Synergeo #35751):
Re: R.B. Fuller On Homossexuality [sic]
> > the behavior of all other living things when their population gets
> > too high. To put it in non-scientific terms, God made gay people
> > in order to save the world from uncontrolled population growth.
>
Re: R.B. Fuller On Homossexuality [sic]
Not sure what's your spin. I disagree with the above "too many" reading, i.e. a civ with plenty of same-sex could just as well be "just right" in the eyes of beholders, including of heteros like me -- a judgment call, with theirs being a call to less fun. I never read Bucky's quotes as condemning or holier than thou in this respect (in other contexts, he breathes fire).
Anti same-sex coupling is more of that self-righteous puritanical crappola that says no one should actually act out the stuff I only dare to imagine. Very hypocritical, when you consider no one gets hurt if truly consenting real adults are at play (misanthropic to deny them creaturely comforts). Happy campers are generally more productive and healthier to boot.
On the other hand, many out there haven't a clue, are dangerous to self and others because unskilled or nefarious. So I'm not saying "anything goes" in my book or that it's wise to be unprotective of self and/or others.
On the contrary, I advocate the propagation of martial arts and personal defense skills, especially for women, who should be prepared to kill if necessary. In this 'Age of the Idiocrats' there's no telling what some morons might try.
Kirby
