Evidence for God from Science

PaulSacramento wrote: The issue with homosexuality is the "passion" the comes from those the defend the right of adults to express their sexual inclinations.
If we remove the "passion" and "political correctness" of it then what we have left is the simple biological fact that IF homosexuality IS genetic (a person is born that way) then it can be viewed as a "birth defect" because homosexuality is NOT in the best interest of the individual OR the group.

Though the bolder bits seem to be opinion....

Why is it not in the best interests of a group?

Much cheers to all.

Thadeyus wrote:
Though the bolder bits seem to be opinion....

Why is it not in the best interests of a group?

Much cheers to all.

There are many 'facts' that show homosexual behavior to be dangerous. Disease, lifespan, etc.

Thadeyus wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote: The issue with homosexuality is the "passion" the comes from those the defend the right of adults to express their sexual inclinations.
If we remove the "passion" and "political correctness" of it then what we have left is the simple biological fact that IF homosexuality IS genetic (a person is born that way) then it can be viewed as a "birth defect" because homosexuality is NOT in the best interest of the individual OR the group.

Though the bolder bits seem to be opinion....

Why is it not in the best interests of a group?

Much cheers to all.

Think about it.
Homosexuality means no reproduction (disregard artificial insemination for now).
That is NOT in the bets interest of the group or species.

jlay wrote:

Thadeyus wrote:
Though the bolder bits seem to be opinion....

Why is it not in the best interests of a group?

Much cheers to all.

There are many 'facts' that show homosexual behavior to be dangerous. Disease, lifespan, etc.

Yes and we also have evidence that promiscuity also leads to those things.
There are also possible socio-psychological issues as well BUT the main issue is that a predominate homosexual group will die off from lack of reproduction.
Homosexuality is NOT in the best interest of the species, there is NO genetic advantage to it at all.

To PaulSacramento.

Um...while an interesting comment....it's not actually an answer to my question.

Much cheers to all.

Thadeyus wrote:To PaulSacramento.

Um...while an interesting comment....it's not actually an answer to my question.

Much cheers to all.

Sorry dude but I am not sure how it could be any clearer.
Homosexuality is NOT in the best interest of the group/species because they would die out.

PaulSacramento wrote:Sorry dude but I am not sure how it could be any clearer.
Homosexuality is NOT in the best interest of the group/species because they would die out.

To that statement I can only, simply can answer 'Twaddle' and 'balderdash'.

Just off the top of my head neither the Athenians nor the Spartans were ever in danger of going 'extinct' due to certain cultural aspects of their society.

Now...if you want to keep saying,

"A group of nothing but people who bat for the same team would go extinct." (And note, this still only applies to a male version. As I previously pointed out, a whole group of Amazons could get along quite well with simply stealing what they needed. Hence why I was seeking more of an answer and reply.)

Then, okay, your really silly example is okay and would probably very 'Lord of the flies' disappear within one short span of time.

But that makes your comment being left looking an awful lot like it's wearing RickD's avatar make up.

Much cheers to all.

Thadeyus wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Sorry dude but I am not sure how it could be any clearer.
Homosexuality is NOT in the best interest of the group/species because they would die out.

To that statement I can only, simply can answer 'Twaddle' and 'balderdash'.

Just off the top of my head neither the Athenians nor the Spartans were ever in danger of going 'extinct' due to certain cultural aspects of their society.

Now...if you want to keep saying,

"A group of nothing but people who bat for the same team would go extinct." (And note, this still only applies to a male version. As I previously pointed out, a whole group of Amazons could get along quite well with simply stealing what they needed. Hence why I was seeking more of an answer and reply.)

Then, okay, your really silly example is okay and would probably very 'Lord of the flies' disappear within one short span of time.

But that makes your comment being left looking an awful lot like it's wearing RickD's avatar make up.

Much cheers to all.

Athenian and Spartan culture were Bisexual, not homosexual.
Spartans were required by law to marry.
You will NOT find any case of a homosexual group existing beyond a few generations at best.
This is common sense and not really sure why you are arguing.
From a biological POV, homosexuality is NOT a beneficial trait for humans.

PaulSacramento wrote:. Athenian and Spartan culture were Bisexual, not homosexual.
Spartans were required by law to marry.
You will NOT find any case of a homosexual group existing beyond a few generations at best.
This is common sense and not really sure why you are arguing.
From a biological POV, homosexuality is NOT a beneficial trait for humans.

*Scratches head* Yah...I did agree that a "Male only batting team" is going to have a very short shift.

However...my question was "Why is it not in the best interests of a group?"

See? A scattering of same batters mixed in with the bunch. As in a large herd only some of whom are same bat predisposed. As in lots of peoples, of which a small percentage (Heck push it up to maybe 50% *shrug*).

(Also...still doesn't explain any Amazon examples....)

I want to challenge both Paul and Thad for a minute. Don't have any particular agenda here, just came to my mind.
Forget the gay thing for a minute.

Let's just assume for a moment that there was a genetic trait for celabacy. Is celabacy then wrong? Does it have benefits in the best interest of the group?

jlay wrote:I want to challenge both Paul and Thad for a minute. Don't have any particular agenda here, just came to my mind.
Forget the gay thing for a minute.

Let's just assume for a moment that there was a genetic trait for celibacy. Is celibacy then wrong? Does it have benefits in the best interest of the group?

Well..it's not actually a long shot that there may be some sort of thing that randomly pops up in the genetic shuffling and hence leads people to not do the horizontal rumba.

I think the view that a person's worth is determined by their breeding is a little weird. Which is what I seem to be reading from the posts.

"If you can't have children, you're a very bad person."

I was just saying that there's more to people's interactions with the society at large than as just breeding machines, y'know?

Thadeyus wrote:

jlay wrote:I want to challenge both Paul and Thad for a minute. Don't have any particular agenda here, just came to my mind.
Forget the gay thing for a minute.

Let's just assume for a moment that there was a genetic trait for celibacy. Is celibacy then wrong? Does it have benefits in the best interest of the group?

Well..it's not actually a long shot that there may be some sort of thing that randomly pops up in the genetic shuffling and hence leads people to not do the horizontal rumba.

I think the view that a person's worth is determined by their breeding is a little weird. Which is what I seem to be reading from the posts.

"If you can't have children, you're a very bad person."

I was just saying that there's more to people's interactions with the society at large than as just breeding machines, y'know?

I've always thought of celibacy as more an expression of will or intent as oppossed to a sexual orientation, one could be gay, straight, bi or asexual and take a vow of celibacy - similarly one could be asexual without ever conciously chosing a celibate lifestyle.

PaulSacramento wrote:From a biological POV, homosexuality is NOT a beneficial trait for humans.

Unfortunately biology only has whatever pov we ascribe to it. From what I recall in certain bacterium once a certain population density is reached reproduction will be passed over in favour of mass suicide/ poisoning. From a biological pov an increase in homosexual activity and tolerance of it within the community at never before seen population levels could be seen as a benficial trait for population control, alongside a want for the gay community to adopt whereby we have non-reproducing coulpes taking care of the needy as opposed to ramping up the numbers - but I do accept this is just me playing at a 'biological pov'.

Proinsias wrote:I've always thought of celibacy as more an expression of will or intent as opposed to a sexual orientation, one could be gay, straight, bi or asexual and take a vow of celibacy - similarly one could be asexual without ever consciously choosing a celibate lifestyle.

? Um..I wasn't really thinking of celibacy...more the poor lasses who find themselves barren and have to toddle off to clinics and such to get their sekrit womyn's businesses sorted out.

Or blokes who's todgers are found to be shooting blanks etc.

In neither case are either type of folks going to be producing children either. So...by the gist of this thread they seem to be on the same side of the line that's been drawn about not reproducing being bad.

Much cheers too all.

It was in relation to jlay's idea about genetic celebacy. I think I'm in general agreement with you about there being many ways for one to ensure the continuation of the genepool beyond producing viable offspring. At a fairly basic level if one can still hunt and gather for the group whilst indulging in homosexual activity, or no sexual activity, of an evening they may still be an assest to the group.

Proinsias wrote:It was in relation to jlay's idea about genetic celebacy. I think I'm in general agreement with you about there being many ways for one to ensure the continuation of the genepool beyond producing viable offspring. At a fairly basic level if one can still hunt and gather for the group whilst indulging in homosexual activity, or no sexual activity, of an evening they may still be an assest to the group.

Proinsias,

The underlined made me think that this may be the way they hunted with a spear, "whilst indulging in homosexual activity".
http://youtu.be/tCWz9U0MtoI