0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Gay is a birth defect it's already well known. The human species (and all species for that matter) has 1 purpose. To reproduce, if one of them can't because there sexual attraction prevents this it's a defect. Huamns are made to be stright. I don't care if someones gay but its redicilious to deny the obvious.
I know what you're thinking: "Oh God not another gay thread." But as I was reading a few old threads, I stumbled upon this, and I think it's necessary to explore it further:QuoteGay is a birth defect it's already well known. The human species (and all species for that matter) has 1 purpose. To reproduce, if one of them can't because there sexual attraction prevents this it's a defect. Huamns are made to be stright. I don't care if someones gay but its redicilious to deny the obvious.- Inject.I'm curious. How is it that, after hundreds of thousands of years worth of evolution, homosexuality was never eliminated from the human species (and several other animal species as well)? I understand that we humans do tend to carry on defects. Down's syndrome, for instance. However, people afflicted with said syndrome or other defects are not abundant, and they represent a rather small minority. However, homosexuals, even thought they are not as abundant as heterosexuals, represents an ever growing statistic. Who knows how many gay men and women are out there. Coming out for some people is still hard in many places of the globe, so the statistics we posses can hardly be called accurate for the total amount of worldwide homosexuals. But anyways, back to the point. If homosexuality is a defect, shouldn't it have been eliminated or at least diminished after years of evolution? This is a wild personal hypothesis with little evidence, but I think we should take into consideration that fact that MAYBE, and just maybe, homosexuality is one of nature's population-control methods. In order to avoid overpopulation, some individuals are born homosexuals, thus efficiently stopping reproduction to a large degree.Anyways, those are my 2 cents for now. /discuss
I'm curious. How is it that, after hundreds of thousands of years worth of evolution, homosexuality was never eliminated from the human species (and several other animal species as well)? I understand that we humans do tend to carry on defects. Down's syndrome, for instance. However, people afflicted with said syndrome or other defects are not abundant, and they represent a rather small minority. However, homosexuals, even thought they are not as abundant as heterosexuals, represents an ever growing statistic. Who knows how many gay men and women are out there. Coming out for some people is still hard in many places of the globe, so the statistics we posses can hardly be called accurate for the total amount of worldwide homosexuals. But anyways, back to the point. If homosexuality is a defect, shouldn't it have been eliminated or at least diminished after years of evolution? This is a wild personal hypothesis with little evidence, but I think we should take into consideration that fact that MAYBE, and just maybe, homosexuality is one of nature's population-control methods. In order to avoid overpopulation, some individuals are born homosexuals, thus efficiently stopping reproduction to a large degree.Anyways, those are my 2 cents for now. /discuss
In the modern West, according to major studies, 2% to 13% of the population is homosexual or has had some form of same-sex sexual contact within his or her lifetime.[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] In a 2006 study 20% of respondents anonymously reported some homosexual feelings, although fewer participants identified themselves as homosexual.
about 1.5% of people have autism, which is about 46,000,000 people
2 percent of the world's population has Down syndrome.
We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.
Valuve Admin Steve: If not we at valve can act as a "guardian gateway".Valuve Admin Steve: I will be your daddy.
Inject, I think that the problem that we reach here is: What exactly is a "defect"? With the current state of affairs, with overpopulation, with people swarming in every single inch of this poor planet, is homosexuality a defect? Granted, you may say it's a biological defect. I stand my ground on that point. There are many hypothesis out there, and I will try to show you proper links once I find them. One of them suggests that homosexuals are individuals that provide but demand little. In a family group environment, a homosexual male or female can protect the genetic material that lives in the bodies of his heterosexuals brothers and sisters offspring without producing more demand (more offspring). In a way, by defending the offspring of their relatives, they are encouraging the spread of their own DNA to a large extent, since said offspring shares a large amount of their genetic material. There are also studies that show that sisters of homosexuals brothers have a higher fertility rate than sisters of heterosexuals brothers. Nature balances itself out. Ultimately, I stand on my point. The statistics for homosexuality are bigger than the statistics for harmful mutations. Homosexuality has survived eons, has survived evolution. Even if we cannot quite understand the reason for homosexuality just yet, it is my firm conviction that there is one, else it would not exist as it currently does. And if humanity is finally able to modify our species genetic makeup as it sees fit, I believe homosexuality, if anything, should be encouraged. Earth has no more space.
Nature doesn't balance it self out in that scene. There's no magic forces playing part.
Homosexuality is a defect. It should be stopped in terms of having future births with it and it is NOT natures way of fixing population that would be absurd and insane to think so.
QuoteNature doesn't balance it self out in that scene. There's no magic forces playing part. I never mentioned magic and I have no idea why you imply that I did. When I speak of nature, I speak of evolution, essentially. When I speak of population crisis I mean the sheer amount of people in the planet. No need to get worked up about terminology. The world is undergoing a major population DENSITY crisis and this cannot be denied. We are 7 billion human beings and the growth curve is ascending steeply. QuoteHomosexuality is a defect. It should be stopped in terms of having future births with it and it is NOT natures way of fixing population that would be absurd and insane to think so.It should be stopped in terms of having future births? As in genetically modifying the human genome to eliminate the hypothetical "gay gene" and avoiding more homosexuals to be born? Em, why, exactly? Does it threaten human survival? With 7 billion people, I think not. And besides, if you were to progressively eliminate homosexuality, what about the quickly shortening minority of gay people? What would they do? Surely this process would not be immediate. Which means that there would still be gay people in some parts of the globe but they would be condemned to live, perhaps, lonely lives, due to the lack of "potential mates". If eliminating homosexuality is not imperative for human survival, then what's the point?And please, do tell me just why it would be "absurd and insane" to think that homosexuality is nature's way of fixing population density?
This whole thing is a travesty.For starters, Pillz is obviously the sexiest.
the likelihood of there being a gay gene is practically 0%
Quotethe likelihood of there being a gay gene is practically 0%Don't be so quick to jump to conclusions Jorg. We have a VERY limited understanding of the human genome. It will be a while until we can finally decipher which gene sequences do exactly what. I would avoid making absolute statements until then. Same goes to everybody else.Also, I would encourage you to read this: http://www.skeptictank.org/gaygene.htm
Is this hard to understand?