One hears a lot these days, from our know-it-all younger generation, about how to maintain our current level of quality of life by reverting to sustainable sources of energy, like wind power, solar power, by getting rid of internal combustion engines, by foregoing air conditioning and forced-air home heating, all of which leftists claim will make our nation more sustainable by using less carbon power, but in actuality would only make America poorer and less safe in a very dangerous world.
But another area where our young smart-set hasn’t yet thought of applying the theory of sustainability is the area of human reproduction, and especially the area housing the assumed wisdom and empowerment of homosexuality. Young people are, I’m certain, aware that a male and a female participant are required (not three or fifty sexual preferences or identities as listed in government approved lists, but one male sperm and one female egg) to create one, or several in rare cases, new human being.
So it’s not possible for homosexuals to adequately sustain their own area of sexual interest with only males or only females participating in the effort. Gays have brought LGBTQ identifiers into the class of allegedly discriminated-against people who at least share the liberal, political leanings that are related to warming/change and sustainability, yet they are unable to create even one additional person of their own sexual persuasion by practicing only with someone of the same sex. So sustainability is impossible for these enlightened people.
In the meantime we heteros are carrying the load of creating new citizens for the LGBTQ/Gay slackers, from which population they will extract some of the homosexual product.
One wisely questions the leftist rhetoric of “sustainability” in general, but in the case of reproduction and homosexuality, it’s an open and shut case of sustainability being a load of misguided, political offal.