Homosexuality and Natural Selection.

Hello. I am CDarwin. I am new here and I would call myself a defender of Darwin. In the last & years I work in Santa Monica where a number of Christain evangelicals confront people on the street and discredit Evolution.I have done well with the crowd on many nights with this faith based group. But recently I have found that the Non-religious have a difficult time understanding Evolution and the Natural selection process.I come across Gay people that tell me that Evolution invented gay people to cure over population. I tell them this is not how the process of Natural selection works.N.S. ( natural selection) is not intelligent nore knowlegeable of the numbers of any life form on the planet. N.S. is the process of change and non change in a species. Evolution is the result of N.S. and is incapible of thinking out a solution to a given problem like over population.But like the religious people I talk to the Gay community in Santa Monica seem to want to see evolution as a reason they exist.It mat be correct that Homosexuality is genetic but yet unproven.This is a problem I have because if I say it is not I am called Anti -Gay and homophobic which I am not. But how do I get the message that Evolution does not try to reach a Pre-destination? It seems like two very diffrent groups want to see Evolution to fit their own agenda.What can I do?

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

somewhere in the Biological forum, there's a thread that got into this subject--as a tangent. Morality, Charity According to Evolutionsomewhere in there, we ended up discussing how homosexuality could evolve.The conclusion--it confers an evolutionary advantage in the family--helping offspring to survive. Because the homosexual isn't having children, he can focus his attention on helping to care for the children in his extened family--and the gene (if it is genetic) could be passed on--being part of a family with a homosexual increases you're chance of actually having the gene. My memory, though, if very fuzzy on this. explore the thread and you'll find it in there.At least you won't have to be labelled as being anti-gay

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

I feel that whether it is or isn't genetic, has no bearing on what people "feel" it is. If someone you come across can't understand that thought, and wants to call you a homophobe, then they are the ones with the problem.The pentagon has released a detailed report saying that being homosexual is a mental disorder, although that is being refuted. If thats the case, then I would think any sexual preference could be considered a mental disorder, as we all have one. Just keep telling them the truth.What I don't understand is, just how is the faith-based group using evolution to suit their agenda?You can also point out that if gay people want to believe that evolution has a purpose, or intelligence, then there is a lot of other explaining that needs to taken into account. I am sure if you examine it, and pose a question to them, they will see how evolution is not it's own entity, but just a theory. We are not borg.

That's pretty funny.ABE, or maybe it just means he/she is supposed to be a Preist Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

I always thought that gay jeans were those darn tight fitting ones!

And what people "feel" it is has no bearing on what it "is". Whether homosexuality is "right" or "wrong", an "order" or a "disorder", a homophobe is still a homophobe.I wonder if nature selects for homophobia?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

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

The problem you are dealing with is the attempt to invoke teleology - the inference that everything is guided, or in some way goal-oriented. You can only point out that there is no evidence whatsoever that evolution is in any way a guided process.This is what the theists tend to dislike most about ToE - the fact that it posits no role for a god of any kind. Theistic evolutionists like to view the process as 'god's mechanism of creation' but it's just an attempt to rationalize their predetermined belief in a god.

This is exactly what I said, only in reverse. I am in no way trying to justify what people feel about it. I am saying that their feelings may be unwarranted.The OP is afraid of being called a homophobe by gays who do not even know how to define evolution, or why they are gay. Seems like they are just quick to pull the homophobe trigger. I find that just as bad as being an actual homophobe.Homophobe is fear of homosexuals, but then what do you call someone who is afraid of being called a homophobe?

homophobiphobia
"fear of being a feared of a queer" (all in good humor)

---

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

I feel there is truth in that statement, but to be fair, if you put a bunch of heterosexuals on the island, who were born with the inability to procreate, they would also die out.In my quest to try and justify marraige as being just a man and a woman, it came down to just those points. To me the real reason for being married is to have children, and start a family, otherwise we are just hanging out being friends for life, and screwing each other.This obviously way different from what actually is, and people who are married with no desire to have children take ofense to that thought. So I came to the conclusion that the world is just way too fucked up, starting with me first, and I will leave it up to God's grace and mercy to sort it all out. I will just try and love the next person, and not throw stones.Sounds like the gathering your speaking of is just that, an illegitamite stone throwing contest, and you will never convince either side of anything, because you are not dealing directly with the underlying motives of either side.It all boils down to love. What would love do? Some people in here seem to think that love is the culmination of our basic survival instincts, but there is no survival instinct in a gay sex(not relationship), as it doesn't lead to carrying on the human race. so to me love is way deeper than just evolved survival instincts. Love conquers all. In all this, who is loving who?

I was going to say that too. But it is not fear of being fearful of homo's, it's fearful of being called fearful of being homo.Just looked up some phobias:
Nomatophobia- Fear of names.
Onomatophobia- Fear of hearing a certain word or of names.

But what happens if:

• you put a bunch of straight men on an island?
• you put a bunch of straight women on an island?
• you put a bunch of homosexual men and women on an island?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It depends how they say it and what they mean when they say it. I might say that evolution invented certain cell structures that fox antibiotics to cure 'antibiotic death' in bacteria.In a way I'm right, but my language is informal.It has been observed that some organisms limit how many offspring they have in overpopulated conditions. This is generally done by limiting the size of a litter or the number of eggs laid etc. This can be explained quite easily using evolution mechanisms.The idea that homosexuality is an evolutionary response to overpopulation is on the face of it feasable, but I'm not convinced. Why not render the male or female infertile? It's quicker and more effective for sure.My money is on the situation being a little more complicated than all that.