Home

Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause Posted on: Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:50:58 -0800

No One wrote:
> Rudy Canoza writes:
>
>> No One wrote:
>
>>> Except comparision of identical to fraternal twins show that .ual
>>> orientation has a strong genetic component to it.
>> It's an extremely tentative conclusion that in no way constitutes
>> "proof". Try again.
>
> You need to learn some biology

You were talking psychology, queer.
2104004. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104005. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104006. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104007. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104008. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104009. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104010. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104011. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104012. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104013. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104014. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104015. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104016. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104017. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104018. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104019. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104020. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104021. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104022. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause
2104023. Re: Proposition 8: no violation of Equal Protection clause