On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:09:24 GMT, David Johnston
puked:
>On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:38:56 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)"
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:23:25 GMT, David Johnston
>>puked:
>>
>>>On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:28:28 GMT, "lab~rat >:-)"
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:32:34 -0400, Dionisio
>>>> puked:
>>>>
>>>>>lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, not only are homo.uals a smaller set of the entire human
>>>>>> population, but a smaller percentage of homo.uals get married than
>>>>>> hetero.uals. Even then, in many cases those marriages aren't
>>>>>> recognized legally, so they can't be accounted for, leaving you with a
>>>>>> big hole in your statistics.
>>>>>
>>>>> Speaking of stats... If they can't be accounted for, then how do you know that
>>>>>...s get married less often?
>>>>
>>>>Because there are less ...s.
>>>
>>>That's pretty meaningless.
>>
>>Are you doing this on purpose or are you just a little slow? If there
>>are less ...s than straights, which is a given, who do you think gets
>>married the most?
>
>The two things are unrelated in any meaningful way.
What's the answer to the question?
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans... |
