Discussion World Forum

Discussion World Forum (http://www.discussionworldforum.com/forums.php)
-   Science (http://www.discussionworldforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=22)
-   -   Homosexuality and Evolution (http://www.discussionworldforum.com/showthread.php?t=4910)

shekib82 Feb 10th 2014 07:22 PM

Homosexuality and Evolution
 
OK first of all I oppose both theories. But this will be a reasoning at absurdum.

If people were born with homosexual predilections, how would they still exist?

I mean if you look at evolutionary theories of Homo Sapiens and modern man you will find that Humanity according to this theory is very old. Old enough to escape any social pressure that would have forced homosexuals to marry and thus pass their preferences to their children.

So how would they exist? How would evolution allow it?

Now, current thinking is that evolution is about natural selection. It is not about best or worse but human nature taking its course and selecting things according to the environment.

How would that idea bring about people who cannot in any way, shape or form have kids. Because they cannot have sex?

How is that human innate nature? As opposed to a choice that people make in their lives?

shekib82 Feb 10th 2014 07:24 PM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Another important point to add to this debate. Men derive a special pleasure when they get penetrated from their rear end. It is due to stimulating the prostate. Anyone who had any medical problems with their prostate, had an exam done by a urologist and felt a little bit of what gays feel during gay sex.

So there you go. The greatest debate on the planet. Gays do gay sex because they like it. Not because they can't help it. Or it is their nature. Or they were born that way.....

shekib82 Feb 10th 2014 07:32 PM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Another great debate is about Marriage.

Here's what you get when type "define: marriage" into google:
"the formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognised by law, by which they become husband and wife"

The reason for this is clear. Two sexes. It is religious. and It is biological. Only the combination of these two sexes can make babies.

As for any tax benefits or what-have you, gays could argue for civil unions. And so can polygamists, etc...

If it is about other benefits, they could create special contracts in courts and use them....

don't see what the fuss is about.

I mean you also have people who are straight who have sex with multiple partners all the time and never get married. They don't scream that the church is persecuting them.

Honest to God I was watching the BBC tonight and saw a new anchor telling a catholic bishop that he was a communist because he wanted to give money to the poor. Then went out to drill him about gay rights. This is stupid.
Not being able to marry a guy when you are a guy is not a human right.

You can have the same thing and not call it marriage. What is the problem?

Donkey Feb 10th 2014 08:02 PM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by shekib82 (Post 85713)
OK first of all I oppose both theories. But this will be a reasoning at absurdum.

If people were born with homosexual predilections, how would they still exist?

I mean if you look at evolutionary theories of Homo Sapiens and modern man you will find that Humanity according to this theory is very old. Old enough to escape any social pressure that would have forced homosexuals to marry and thus pass their preferences to their children.

So how would they exist? How would evolution allow it?

Now, current thinking is that evolution is about natural selection. It is not about best or worse but human nature taking its course and selecting things according to the environment.

How would that idea bring about people who cannot in any way, shape or form have kids. Because they cannot have sex?

How is that human innate nature? As opposed to a choice that people make in their lives?

Homosexuality, first of all, isn't binary, but for the sake of argument let us suppose it is.

Homosexuality is an outlier. It doesn't stand in the way of human reproduction any more than anything else. :shrug:

MeMyselfAndI Feb 10th 2014 08:32 PM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey (Post 85716)
Homosexuality, first of all, isn't binary, but for the sake of argument let us suppose it is.

Homosexuality is an outlier. It doesn't stand in the way of human reproduction any more than anything else. :shrug:

Well, it does, somewhat. Men cannot reproduce with other men ;)

shekib82 Feb 10th 2014 08:36 PM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey (Post 85716)
Homosexuality, first of all, isn't binary, but for the sake of argument let us suppose it is.

Homosexuality is an outlier. It doesn't stand in the way of human reproduction any more than anything else. :shrug:

When you say it is not binary, you just validate my point. You go on to do so further when you say that it does not stand in the way of human reproduction.

To be clear, you have just admitted that it is a choice.

Donkey Feb 10th 2014 09:10 PM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MeMyselfAndI (Post 85717)
Well, it does, somewhat. Men cannot reproduce with other men ;)

Irrelevant on the species scale.
Quote:

Originally Posted by shekib82 (Post 85718)
When you say it is not binary, you just validate my point. You go on to do so further when you say that it does not stand in the way of human reproduction.

To be clear, you have just admitted that it is a choice.

Lolwat?

NickKIELCEPoland Feb 11th 2014 02:16 AM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by shekib82 (Post 85713)
If people were born with homosexual predilections, how would they still exist?

By most people being heterosexual perhaps? Just a thought.
It's the same with people who cannot have children - a minority just cannot, but most people can - thus people continue to exist.

shekib82 Feb 11th 2014 02:33 AM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey (Post 85719)
Irrelevant on the species scale.


Lolwat?

what's my argument Donkey?

shekib82 Feb 11th 2014 02:36 AM

Re: Homesexuality and Evolution
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by NickKIELCEPoland (Post 85723)
By most people being heterosexual perhaps? Just a thought.
It's the same with people who cannot have children - a minority just cannot, but most people can - thus people continue to exist.

Is there such a thing as innate infertility? How many people are born genetically not able to have kids? What are the names of those conditions?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008 - 2017, DiscussionWorldForum.com