Homosexuality and Natural Selection.

That's easy. If you put a bunch of gay men on an island, they'll eventually die out. But if you put a bunch of straight men and women on an island, evolution has insured us that the chances of them dying out is a lot less due to our ability to procreate and sex drive.I think I actually worded it better than you did

Has it occurred to anyone here that whether or not homosexuality is advantageous or disadvantageous in evolutionary terms has absolutely no bearing on whether it is A-OK to be gay or not?What I have seen so far is a hardcore creationist or two who have repeatedly claimed that the theory of evolution is just bullock using in this thread the theory itself to attempt to indirectly bash gay people. Isn't it time you people try to be more "christ-like"?

I wasn't referring to you.

Riverrat, even though I realize that questioning one's credentials violates some kind of forum rules, but I really must ask after you asked this question. Where do you get your knowledge in biology from: school, the press, popular culture, your local preacher, or common sense?The reason I ask is because just about everything you say seems to have come straight from thin air. Even your questions demonstrate lack of understanding of what you are talking about.Edited by gasby, : No reason given.

And yet there are still hundreds upon hundreds of millions upon millions of christians, muslims, and the likes around the world.

Joking aside, I don't think that's true at all. When I was younger I used to attend these religious youth things. You'd be amazed to find out how much sex goes on after each ceremony.Added by edit...All of which had taken a vow of abstinence until marriage. Always amazed me how that works.Edited by gasby, : No reason given.

I just noticed this post.You've taken your words out of context. Try to think back where you made such a comment and in what context you were commenting on to who. Hint: It was a great debate thread.

If you want to put it in terms of love, then shouldn't it be the case that whether or not the other person is of opposite sex or not you'd want to marry him/her? In fact, throughout my life I've had many great male friends as best buddies. I should have married one of them, then? We did, after all, do everything together. Despite the fact that this has been explained a kazillion times on here, you still manages to miss it.Evolution and Natural Selection does not necessarily mean the pumping out of as many offspring as you possibly can. Having a gay uncle helping to raise you up does have its advantages. I am reminded of the grandmother hypothesis. Oh, sure. It is entirely possible that there is a world wide conspiracy where humans and animal alike decide to be homosexuals and try to pass it as not having a choice about it. Those gay ducks, penguins, apes, etc. as well as my gay friends sat in a dark room together and consciously decided to be gay. What about gay ducks, penguins, apes, cats, and a myriad other animal species that have homosexual members? Are they, too, influenced by the liberal agenda? How about to take care of your siblings' children? Again, were gay ducks under some kind of duck societal pressure to be gay? Again, you are trying to pass off the argument of making a comparason between sex between 2 or more consenting adults and rape as somehow valid. It's all in your head. Nobody is trying to convince you that it's a-okay. I certainly am under no obligation to try to convince you that my right handedness is a-okay. My wife is under no obligation to try to convince you that her left handedness is a-okay.You seem to start out a priori that there is something wrong with homosexuality and that the rest of us have to somehow convince you that it's a-okay. You should be aware that I am under no moral or legal obligation to convince you that I should be able to have sex with Steve or any other consenting male adult in the population.

Do you at all remember our conversation on this just a couple or so months ago where I referenced a research that led to a "cure" of animal homosexuality? Surely, if the trait can be cured via experimental procedures then wouldn't this be an indication of it being more than just a personal choice?

We could also look at it from the other standpoint. When they do invent a "cure", being heterosexual certainly will be a matter of choice also.

This is like the twightlight zone where things that we have been repeating for years somehow get lost while on their way to your brain.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

Who are you responding to? If you are responding to multiple people, could you name a few? For now, I'm not sure how to respond to your question.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

But this is not what it really is all about! It doesn't matter if homosexuality is a choice or not. I would hate to limit someone's rights just because he "chose" to be in a same-sex relationship.I see our conversations here about the genetics and whatnot of homosexuality as purely (1) entertainment, (2) educational, and (3) for its own sake.If we really want to base our legislations on whether something is a choice or not, where does it stop? Should people born with some sort of genetic mutation that makes them more prone to murder be allowed to get away with murder?I'm just saying that the argument that gay people should have the rights they deserve simply they were born that way is a bullshit argument. There are a lot more at stake here, mainly our rights to choose.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

Nemesis, I feel like you live in the twightlight zone or something where words in our messages to you just disappear while on their way to your brain. The answers to your specific questions have been answered at least a dozen times in this thread alone. And yet, you keep repeating your same argument... is there a miniature blackhole between your computer monitor and your eyes?For starter, you can take a look at my message 136 in this thread. Allow me to quote myself. Past studies have shown, particularly in apes, that having a gay uncle does give a baby ape better chances of a safe childhood as well as a healthy upbringing.Even though noone has been able to find any single "gay gene" yet, just the mere fact that animal can be "cured" of their homosexuality via experimental procedures should be at least a small clue that it CAN be not a choice.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

I would argue that trying to "prove" that homosexuality is normal would hurt not only your cause but also mine. Normalcy by what standard? If we are talking about comparason to the majority, homosexuality is far from normal... and neither is redheadedness. If we are talking about normalcy in the sense of nature versus nurture, this is exactly what we are debating. That's easy. The nature of this discussion is purely for entertainment, education, and its own sake.Dameeva, I noticed that you live in australia. I was swearing up and down, left and right, and in and out when I found out Australia passed a gay marriage ban a few years back. From what I read as well as my contacts in Australia, there were christian fundamentalists screaming hate speeches and christian children holding signs of condemnation of gays (we're talking about 5 year olds here so I doubt they actually knew what they were doing) before and after the law was passed right out in public in your capitol. Was all those commotions what prompted you to be so sensitive about our debate here?BTW, has that very christian-like law been overturned yet?

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!