Why Marriage Partners Should Be Limited to the OppositeSex

Intercourse with the opposite sex
Involves a natural disadvantage,
A natural drawback, or shortcoming.

So if society "levels the playing field"
By legalizing gay marriage and ending all bias,
The homosexual percentage of the population,
Which at present is something like 2% to 5%,
Will grow to 50% or even more.

I'm not saying that half the people
will become exclusively homosexual,
So much as bisexual,
Omnivorous, so to speak.

What evidence is there to support this claim?
According to an historian I know,
In the days of pagan Rome,
Homosexuality - or at least bisexuality -
Was much more prevalent than it is today.
Something like 50% of the population.

Another bit of evidence supporting my claim:
Public acceptance of homosexuality
Has dramatically increased as TV sitcoms, etc
Have presented gays as ordinary people,
Relatively harmless compared to gangsters,etc.
In particular, public acceptance
of gay marriage("marriage equality") has skyrocketed.
Within a single decade it has doubled,
Going from one third, to two thirds!

Now if acceptance of it can grow that much,
PARTICIPATION in it, gay sex,likewise,
can proliferate, potentially speaking.

So the question to ask is this:
Would society be harmed if half the people,
Became practicing homosexuals,
Or at least bisexuals?

If so, then that fact, - by itself -
Would be enough of a reason
To oppose the legalizing of gay marriage.

What do I mean by "harmed"?
Well, tentatively speaking, anything
That keeps kids from developing into real adults.
For example, the "underclass" is made up
of adults that are adults in name only.
They are illiterate or at least
The equivalent of illiterate.
They can read but don't bother to do so.
The "underclass" can be thought of as
40 year-old teenagers or even adolescents.
They are in a state of "arrested development."

Why does that matter?
Because people that pursue "animal" pleasure
Instead of useful knowledge, skill-sets,
Don't get good-paying jobs, usually.
Hence, they contribute very little to the tax base!
They are a drag on society, a liability,
Not the kind of asset that society needs.

If an increasing percentage of the population
Developed their innate potential to be homosexuals,
 - The potential that every body has -
How would that relate to the "underclass"?
Would it mean an expanding underclass
Or perhaps a shrinking underclass?
That is the sort of question that should be considered.

Finally, just what did i mean
when at the outset of this poem
I claimed that,
"Intercourse with the opposite sex
involves a natural disadvantage"?
To put it another way,
What natural advantage does
Same-sex intercourse offer?
What is "superior",so to speak,
About same-sex intercourse?
What is the attraction of same-sex sex?

Well, for starters,
You are dealing with a "known quantity."
If a male has never touched
the private parts of another male,
he still has an inbuilt competence
Or knowledge of those parts!
Why, because he has already familiarized
Himself with his own genitals
Via "auto-eroticism" or masturbation.

But he LACKS that sense of "insider" knowledge
Of the private parts of the opposite sex.
Why, because he doesn't have
the same anatomy that she does.Duh.

"Knowledge is power."
And power is what? Attractive!
So if homosexuality offers
a sense of increased knowledge
"Insider information" so to speak,
Doesn't it stand to reason
That this "knowledge" is attractive,
That it has drawing power?

Enough for now.
More later on the advantage
that same-sex sex has over heterosexual intercourse.