Biological instinct in female to seek out a mate outside of the group.

Incest may be a factor here. This trait may be hidden, as it impacts reproduction growth and can be metabolized in the female. The thread of incest spreads more than immediate family and is quite complicated. E.g. a man can marry his neice but a woman cannot marry her nephew. Its like the woman knows by instinct what is best in this regard.

Its to do with blood lines - several pages are devoted to what constitutes incest in the Hebrew bible - it is surprising and complicated. Thereafter, it enters the science/medicine/biology faculty - if an action is damaging to reproduction, there is an instinctual trait not to like it. Marrying kin can be both normal or not normal in small restrictive margins, some being damaging to healthy growth, and anything which is close to the damaging point is involintarilly rejected; this can impact on a close relationship from childhood.

quote:

---

No, clarify. Not obfuscate.

---

It aligns with an involuntary rejection/aversion of what is damaging to reproduction; marrying kin has benefecial factors like keeping the wealth in tact, etc - but it also has precarious impacts when there is a blood line connection, such as deformities in the offspring. The latter causes a warning sign and rejection syndrome. ToE calls it survival of the fittest and natural selection. This same syndrome is also seen with gay - it is not a moral/ethical premise as imagined by society but an existential one, the reason it is rejected by the majority.

No, but incest can. Most of the world does not realize this and gay are not ethical or moral factors but existential ones. If 20% of the world pop becomes gay, humanity will not survive after a few generations. Its been a difficult issue throughout history.

quote:

---

One key one seems to be that one must be exclusively homosexual or heterosexual, another that those who are homosexual forgo all interest in having children.

---

I never said any of that. However, anything which can effect reproduction inherently impacts; it is a biological issue we have no choices of.

There are also facts stated and these are not negatable. Ignoring them is more wrong than right, because it fails to acknowledge the issue. Progress is only possible when all sides of an issue are accounted. Bearing this in mind, what is the solution which is correct?

No brain salad, no need for substantiation. The fact was put up. Yes, if 20% of the population goes gay - humanity goes pop! Which part is confusing or non-factual other than deflecting from this blatancy? Its not about gays - its about hetros and gays and humanity as a whole, which must always take precedence of the individual, and what the true situation confronting us actually is in the big picture.Now most of us westerners will decry the Hebrew bible as being not moral or ethical to gay/incest rights, rght? Wrong! The moral/ethical parts come from the Hebrew exclusively [sounds haughty - but also its true] - nothing comes from the Gospels or Quran which humanity as a whole accepts - get it? When one sees this law as existential, then the entire picture changes. At the same time, humanity must take a path which is moral and ethical, as gays are brothers and sisters - a father, child or loved one can be gay. Here, the law becomes a testing how we proceed, presenting us with great enigmas. So bearing the correct criteria - I ask how should the issue be addressed? You pretended you don't understand!With regard to incest, again the law rests on humanity as a whole, which takes precedence of the individual. One must ask themselves, how will they react if say a 50 year old male neighbour invites you to celebrate the birth of a child - gotten from a union of him and his 25 year old biological daughter. Remember its of a true love and of mutual consent and they are not hurting anyone - they have a right to happiness. That is the issue where must place their answer - bang within those enigmas.The genes and metabolism factor of course kicks in here. Because something which is not conducive to reproduction [continuance of humanity] has an automatic biological impact - its involuntary, like immune cells spitting out a harmful virus. Thus far, many have cited if stoning is legitimate - because this all comes from the Hebrew bible. This is a deflection - the stoning part only represents ancient ways when one got his hands chopped for a parking fine. In fact, there is no difference in the issue concerning incest and gays - one cannot dislodge either as both rest on the same criteria: no judge can negate one and condone the other.What's your answer?Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Looking at our closest genetic relative's behavior. Female chimps frequently leave their natal group upon reaching maturity....the idea being that since males rarely leave their natal group over generations, females leave naturally to avoid possible incest. Whether these females would be found more attractive among the males of a new group? Im not sure Ive ever read anything like that.

---

I suspect here there is a natural affinity to emulate kin and loves ones as the comfort zone, but another factor also kicks in when this is achieved too closely. This can well align with the law to GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY as being an inherent trait. It says both - emulate what you learn from parents and community; while also not to co-inhabit with them. Its a double edged sword.

quote:

---

I think the possibility of incest may be at the root of a natural attraction of both sexes for people clearly born farther away from the individual. How incest and homosexuality are in anyway similar, I just dont get the logic Joseph. Incest produces unfit offspring, homosexuality does not. If homosexuality was at 20%, the population would continue to grow and homosexuality would stay at 20%...Homosexuals still have a desire to reproduce and many enter into heterosexual relationships or marriages for that very reason, as well as not accepting their sexuality. Homosexuals can have heterosexual children, and straight parents can have gay children...The % of homosexuals in the world has most likely stayed the same as long as human beings have been around (btw if I remember right, this is argued to be in between 5-15% of individuals, depending on who you ask....inevitably sexuality has alot of grey area)....In any case I still think its obviously off-topic

---

The 20% represents the threshold where negative growth enters the picture. This does impact humanity's continuance and appears the reason why there is a rejection seen by hetros - its not bigotry as many confuse this with; its an existential factor, displayed in the mode it manifests itself.

Which part?

Its not personal or an opinion, but a mathematical fact. In many countries of the west, new laws are being considered and enacted which have different impacts from the past and of the future. They are irrefutable factors which must be included.

Because the applicable laws emenate from there. I pointed out the understanding of that law is faulty. Why should I not quote it - is a scientific law.

Yes sir.1M+1F gives 1 offspring.
2M + 2F gives 2 offsrpings.
3M + 1F gives 1 offsrping negative growth.
Negative growth X time = no growth.
No Growth = no humanity.
QED.

Have it your way. Thanks for acknowledging the relevant co-incidence. Brilliant observation!

The math is correct, but you do not want to accept it. The time factor rules negative growth.

I did. Now you have to show what other cause applies that there is a discordance with those who have a problem with incest and gay, and why the correct aw must apply. I said this is caused by the factor of negating reproduction and that this is an involuntary reaction which has nothing to do with bigotry. Your move!