That last paragraph is EXACTLY the crap that irks me to no end. When you equate sexuality solely with reproduction you demean the woman to nothing more than a sack of eggs and a uterus. We need zero population growth as it is. disgusting.
What is disgusting is you playing that card, and not realizing that the male side of the equation (i.e. reducing males to a sack of sperm) had been missed. It's this kind of clap-trap that is used to stifle debate. I doubt the intent of the poster was to reduce woman down to "a sack of eggs and a uterus". Or is intent no longer important?