It seems that the homosexual has no real world to live in. As far asAlthough I think that homosexuality could possibly be explained by Darwinists today, it can never be argued that this predisposition will advance the species. If homosexuals are evolutionists, then arguing that "they're born that way" doesn't help advance their cause.
worldviews go, neither theism nor atheistic views account for homosexuality.
The naturalists rely on the principle of "survival of the fittest" to
assist in supporting their evolutionary view. If, for the sake of argument
naturalism was true, the homosexual would have been sifted out of existence (first, do to the inability to procreate and secondly do to the short life expectancy among male homosexuals). This is just some fodder for further thought.
D.L.DeAguiar
Of course, I haven't seen the benefit in that argument no matter what they believe. Even if one were to grant that homosexuals are born with that proclivity, it doesn't prove that we should therefore embrace it. Bipolar disorder, for example, has a genetic component. Alcoholism can also be attributed in specific cases to a genetic predisposition. Does this mean we should accept it? Or does it mean that these with such a predisposition need to take more care and work harder to avoid the pitfalls of their genetics? A little clear thinking in this area will go a long way in our talk with others about this subject.
Certainly, unfettered Darwinism would tend to sift out species engaging in same-sex practices exclusively, but that seldom happens in brute nature. The natural drive is to continue the species. Even the primates closest to humans that engage in those acts don't do it for long.
ReplyDeleteThe natural drive to propagate the species poses a dillemma to gay advocates: either they can't help to do what they do, having less choice in the matter than brute animals (and go against the evolutionary imperative), or, they can choose what they do, at least part of the time and if they can, then they ARE NOT WHAT THEY DO, at least part of the time.
The consequence of this dillemma should be distasteful for gay advocates: homosexual behavior cannot be justified by appealing to nature; nor can homosexuality be used as the sole, immutable, defining quality of a homosexual person. Homosexuality, then, is subject to choice, and choice does not define a person.
The disorder, then, lies on the preference of a person to choose to engage in gay sex or not. Modern society is choosing more and more to consider this preference a "right" and not a disorder of the will (What's "the will" anyway?-they may ask). Outside of the state of nature, the only chance for people with an exclusive homosexual orientation to survive is to build a legal state protecting their lifestyle choice.
Throw them back to a minimal hunter-gatherer social organization (what many consider the human "state of nature") and see if the Darwinian imperatives increase their chances of survival.
It seems that the gene used to produce the homosexual “predisposition” had to at one time have evolved from another. It doesn’t seem to render it-self consistent with what I thought was integral to evolution, the concept that a thing evolves from a weaker to a stronger state. For a gene to leave out the natural demanding desire to procreate to further itself, to me seems de-evolutionary, also I thought evolution came through the struggle of adapting, a constant morphing to adjust itself with its surrounding. If this were the case what surrounding would have to be necessary in order to morph a gene from a heterosexual to a homosexual proclivity. Now it may be that I am not understanding these “evolutionary principles” the way they are meant to be understood. If that is the case sorry for wasting your time, and scrap the whole thought. But I would like to know the correct way to understanding these principle and others that may exist.
ReplyDeleteD.L.DeAguiar
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe terms homosexual and heterosexual were not invented until the 19th century so I dont think you will find any information before that time. Homosexuality and heterosexuality were both considered deviant orientations in the medical language of the early 20th century. Procreation is not considered to be the sole purpose of sex. Maybe homosexuality has a social role and not a reproductive function that might be beneficial. The social condemnation of homosexuality may play a role in the survival and propagation of gay genes to survive since gay people are encouraged to marry and have children.
ReplyDeleteGenetic factors linked to homosexuality in men apparently boost fertility in women. Female relatives of gay men, on their mother's side of the family, had more children than female relatives of heterosexual men. (Corna et al. 2004)
"It can never be argued that this predisposition will advance the species."
ReplyDeleteActually, someone has done just that:
http://www.innerworlds.50megs.com/gaybrain.htm
It's a very intriguing article, I would suggest reading it the whole way through.
There is alway's alot of opinion's pro's & con's, but let's be right here. Homosexuality is a deviant act against our morales, for you would not be able to sustain life on earth with mating the same sex.
ReplyDeleteWe have just become numb to society shoving this down everyone's throat to make us Believe it is ok! Our Children growing up are also being told it is ok, well ladie & gentleman it is not ok we are just letting everything demoralize us because we are degenerating. The Bible clearly states: Not to lay with the same Sex for it is an Aboination against God & yourself
it is nothing but perversion & know one wants to own up to it!!
I'm not sure why everyone is so concerned with sustaining the human species. We've been doing great! There's a whole lot of us. I mean, maybe homosexuality is a method of population control. What about asexual people? No one is attacking them for their lack of procreational enthusiasm. What about people who just don't want to have children? Are they also wrong? What about masturbation? There's a whole lot of THAT going on, and it seems like men deliberately wasting human seed is a direct violation of this whole "sustain the species" talk. I mean, you could use that argument to support rape and sex addiction! Evolution has not managed to get rid of them so they must be an asset to our survival right? There are also a lot of unwanted children out there with no place to call home. So despite all the condoms, spermicide, homosexuality and wreckless abandonment of man juice our species not only blossoms but struggles to support the life we already have.
ReplyDeleteAnd sorry folks, the whole anti-bible thing isn't going to hold up in a court of law which should be obvious by now. Throughout history people have used the bible to back racism, slavery, and sexism and it just isn't effective enough. Homosexuals are not protesting for god's grace, they are protesting for equal rights. If you feel these claims for equality are being shoved down your throat, try closing your mouth. Your ranting will just be written down in history along side the other bigots that wined when they lost their slaves and women were able to vote and preach.
THANK YOU...BRILLIANT...ENOUGH SAID.
DeleteNEXT TOPIC PLEASE?
I'm not sure why everyone is so concerned with sustaining the human species. We've been doing great! There's a whole lot of us. I mean, maybe homosexuality is a method of population control. What about asexual people? No one is attacking them for their lack of procreational enthusiasm. What about people who just don't want to have children? Are they also wrong? What about masturbation? There's a whole lot of THAT going on, and it seems like men deliberately wasting human seed is a direct violation of this whole "sustain the species" talk. I mean, you could use that argument to support rape and sex addiction! Evolution has not managed to get rid of them so they must be an asset to our survival right? There are also a lot of unwanted children out there with no place to call home. So despite all the condoms, spermicide, homosexuality and wreckless abandonment of man juice our species not only blossoms but struggles to support the life we already have.
ReplyDeleteAnd sorry folks, the whole anti-bible thing isn't going to hold up in a court of law which should be obvious by now. Throughout history people have used the bible to back racism, slavery, and sexism and it just isn't effective enough. Homosexuals are not protesting for god's grace, they are protesting for equal rights. If you feel these claims for equality are being shoved down your throat, try closing your mouth. Your ranting will just be written down in history along side the other bigots that wined when they lost their slaves and women were able to vote and preach.