Homosexuality.

[loveofourlord]

a few quick things.

A) It could be beneficial byproduct, AKA the thing that leads to people being gay, has benefits in heterosexuals at lower amounts. Something that when in guys makes them attracted to other males, in females makes them more likly to breed and have children possibly.

B) it could be a defense mechanism, some species change sex, maybe when too many some percent are gay.

C) there is the theroy that the more children a woman has the more likly subsequent ones are gay due to hormones effecting the children.

 

[Sammy-San]

Well I certainly had a feeling it would be almost impossible to keep a topic like this actually on topic. The question of this topic is quite narrow and deals specifically with understanding homosexuality from within the context of an evolutionary framework of life.

It is a fact that homosexuals cannot reproduce. It is possible for homosexuals to adopt, of course, but that is not reproduction.

It seems to me that from an evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality is not beneficial for the growth and continued existence of a species. There was a study done with fruit flies to suggest that there could be a benefit to homosexuality for a species, but there were a lot of assumptions made in order to come to the results they did, and so I don't know that I would cite that as support.

How can fruit flies be gay when animals don't have parts that are private due to being non moral beings?

 

[KnowtheSilence]

How can fruit flies be gay when animals don't have parts that are private due to being non moral beings?

You've identified a deficiency in your chosen definition of the word 'gay.' The more commonly used definitions do not raise this particular issue.

 

[Sammy-San]

You've identified a deficiency in your chosen definition of the word 'gay.' The more commonly used definitions do not raise this particular issue.

what is the proper definition-animals trying to reproduce with each other

i thought you cant call animals gay due to being different beings than humans

 

[KnowtheSilence]

what is the proper definition-animals trying to reproduce with each other

i thought you cant call animals gay due to being different beings than humans

If the word "gay" means "being sexually attracted to the same sex" or "has engaged/does engage in the act of having sexual relations with members of the same sex" (which are both far more common than your unique and nuanced definition), then yes, non-human animals can be gay.

 

[Sammy-San]

If the word "gay" means "being sexually attracted to the same sex" or "has engaged/does engage in the act of having sexual relations with members of the same sex" (which are both far more common than your unique and nuanced definition), then yes, non-human animals can be gay.

How am I nuanced? Sexual relations means reproductive organs. Does it mean universal for all species?

Sexual relations means private parts-something ethically I wouldn't use to refer animals.

 

[Tanj]

From a purely evolutionary understanding of nature, I don't see how homosexuality is beneficial for mankind.

Well, I could link to studies showing a link between genes that contribute to homosexuality in men to fecundity in women, or others showing that as a society not everyone needs to reproduce to be successful, or even point out the evolution happens to populations, not individuals.

However, I think instead I'll say your incredulity is not a yardstick by which I measure reality.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Well, we are not baboon's or fruit flies. We are humans and we are made in God's image. I have known several gay people in my life and never saw any good come from it in their lives......in fact quite the opposite.

I've seen many gay people that have good positive lives. I 've even seen Christians harp about gay sins. While they need to worry about their own sins.

But please don't try to force me and my family to accept it as normal.

If you cant accept gay people. That's your loss.

I am a bible believing Christian, even though I do not agree with their lifestyle, I would do my best to protect a gay person from harm, just as anybody else.

If you try to deny them of their right, Your a waist of time and not doing anything to protect them.

Yet the gays dislike Christian's, but they support Muslim's flooding our country.

Gays don't hate Christians, Even though some Christians hate them. And also the United States isn't supposed to discriminate against any religion, including Muslims.

Thre are plenty of Gays need to figure out who their friends really are, before it's too late. And it is not the liberals.

Yes, I'm a terrible liberal and will turn my back on gay people. We liberals must all be bad. Even Christian liberal. Give me a break. Maybe you should treat gays better. And maybe the will like you. Who knows.

 

[Desk trauma]

How am I nuanced? Sexual relations means reproductive organs.

I guess president Clinton wasn't a liar going by your definitions.

 

[ForrestM]

I've seen many gay people that have good positive lives. I 've even seen Christians harp about gay sins. While they need to worry about their own sins. If you cant accept gay people. That's your loss. If you try to deny them of their right, Your a waist of time and not doing anything to protect them. Gays don't hate Christians, Even though some Christians hate them. And also the United States isn't supposed to discriminate against any religion, including Muslims. Yes, I'm a terrible liberal and will turn my back on gay people. We liberals must all be bad. Even Christian liberal. Give me a break. Maybe you should treat gays better. And maybe the will like you. Who knows.

You are just a typical liberal. You only hear what you want to hear. I have NEVER treated a gay person badly in an way !! If I saw a Muslim trying to throw a gay person off of a 7 story building I would be the first to stop it !! I don't know any Christian's that hate gays !! All I said is don't try to force me and my children to except it as normal. And no !!! America does not have to let evil people like Obama and Hillary flood our nation with Muslim's !!! The Muslim religion is the definition of hate !!! How stupid can you be ?? Christian's don't murder women, they don't murder gays, they don't strap bombs to themselves !!! Muslim's do !!! What changed in the last 10 years that says those people are welcome here ?? They are not even trying to mix in. Their religion is pure evil !! The gays should be the first ones in line against the Islamization of America !!!! The gays have been suckered into thinking the liberals are on their side, but it is all about VOTES !!! When Sharia law is in America, there will be no more gay pride !!!! It will be "Gays hide".

 

[Freodin]

You are just a typical liberal. You only hear what you want to hear. I have NEVER treated a gay person badly in an way !! If I saw a Muslim trying to throw a gay person off of a 7 story building I would be the first to stop it !! I don't know any Christian's that hate gays !! All I said is don't try to force me and my children to except it as normal. And no !!! America does not have to let evil people like Obama and Hillary flood our nation with Muslim's !!! The Muslim religion is the definition of hate !!! How stupid can you be ?? Christian's don't murder women, they don't murder gays, they don't strap bombs to themselves !!! Muslim's do !!! What changed in the last 10 years that says those people are welcome here ?? They are not even trying to mix in. Their religion is pure evil !! The gays should be the first ones in line against the Islamization of America !!!! The gays have been suckered into thinking the liberals are on their side, but it is all about VOTES !!! When Sharia law is in America, there will be no more gay pride !!!! It will be "Gays hide".

'Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking his head, 'are a sure sign of a diseased mind.' (Terry Pratchett, "Eric")

Considering your rant againt all those "evil" people - which I am sure you don't hate at all - I would really like to see how you treat people that you do not consider "normal".

Or, no, I'd rather not see it.

 

[FireDragon76]

Homosexuals cannot reproduce. Why shouldn't we view people born homosexual as an anomaly that works against the evolution of our species and hope that in time this "gene" or whatever it is goes away? From a purely evolutionary understanding of nature, I don't see how homosexuality is beneficial for mankind.

Most ants in an ant colony are sterile, yet they engage in altruistic behaviors that help their genetic kin to survive, ensuring that some of their own genes are passed down.

 

[FireDragon76]

Another thing to consider is that the older Darwinian theory of evolution does not make a moral judgment about fitness. In fact Darwin himself was quite troubled by his ideas, because he was actually a very conscientious individual who was opposed to the use of violence and enslavement. So what we as human beings should feel or do concerning moral behavior has little to do with evolutionary fitness, from his perspective. Evolution imposes no particular moral imperative on human beings.

 

[possibletarian]

How stupid can you be ?? Christian's don't murder women, they don't murder gays, they don't strap bombs to themselves !!! Muslim's do !!!

But Your God commanded it..
Deuteronomy 22:22: “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel”; and in Leviticus 20:10: “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife— with the wife of his neighbour—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.”

Leviticus 20:13
If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

And as for terrorist attacks only 6% were carried out by Muslims in the U.S. Other groups have them well beat on this one.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-mu...0-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619

 

[PeterRobertson]

Unfortunately, things like facts do not bother many of the people who write here. We are mammals, and the majority (if not all) of mammals exhibit homosexual behaviour. The simple fact that it exists shows that homosexuality cannot lead to serious effects on the population, otherwise natural selection would eliminate it.

 

[ForrestM]

'Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking his head, 'are a sure sign of a diseased mind.' (Terry Pratchett, "Eric")

Considering your rant againt all those "evil" people - which I am sure you don't hate at all - I would really like to see how you treat people that you do not consider "normal".

Or, no, I'd rather not see it.

Yeah whatever. You can't win an argument with a liberal. All you can do is tell me I am a hater. Same old same old. I don't necessarily think the people are evil but the so called religion of Islam is the definition of evil ! The good ones are afraid to open their mouths because they can easily be murdered by their own people. Yes, I call that evil and I will not apologize for it. And yes I am rather passionate about crooked politicians flooding my country with the devil's religion!!!!!!!!! No apologies.

Is Terry Pratchett your uncle ?? He means nothing to me !!!!!!

 

[Sammy-San]

I guess president Clinton wasn't a liar going by your definitions.

How so? Not to be crass, but sexual acts involve organs of reproduction.

 

[KnowtheSilence]

How am I nuanced? Sexual relations means reproductive organs. Does it mean universal for all species?

Sexual relations means private parts-something ethically I wouldn't use to refer animals.

As you've pointed out, animals have reproductive organs but not "private parts" since they're non-potable beings, so your definition of "gay" can't apply to animals. I'd call that nuance.

 

[hedrick]

Well I certainly had a feeling it would be almost impossible to keep a topic like this actually on topic. The question of this topic is quite narrow and deals specifically with understanding homosexuality from within the context of an evolutionary framework of life.

It is a fact that homosexuals cannot reproduce. It is possible for homosexuals to adopt, of course, but that is not reproduction.

You're assuming an overly simple model. Your argument would be right if homosexuality were caused by a single dominant gene. Homosexuals wouldn't reproduce, and therefore the gene wouldn't be passed on. But there are a number of reasons this might not be the case. It's very unlikely that there's a single "gay gene." And even if there were, for your argument to be true it would have to be dominant. More likely there are a number of genes involved, and some are recessive. More likely being homosexual isn't entirely genetic, so that not everyone with the same combination of genes ends up that way. Then it could be beneficial to the population as a whole to have those genes in its gene pool even though people who actually have the combination that predisposes them to be homosexual reproduce less often.

* The genes might be beneficial in other combinations.
* It might be the case that having a few people in the group who aren't interested in women could benefit the group. They were be free to take on important roles without the distraction of children.
* It might be good for the group to have people whose orientation will cause them to form families that adopt orphans.
* Perhaps as population density goes up, it's actually useful to limit reproduction, and groups that do so survive better than those that don't.

These are just examples, intended to show that your argument is too simple. Those specific examples don't have to be true, and it's unlikely that all of them are.

 

[Sammy-San]

As you've pointed out, animals have reproductive organs but not "private parts" since they're non-potable beings, so your definition of "gay" can't apply to animals. I'd call that nuance.

So why are they called homosexuals if they don't have privates-I assume it involves them trying to reproduce with the same gender.