Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen
I think that the trouble has passed enough that I can take off the moderator hat and sound off a bit. I do, however, reserve the right to put it back on if people start acting crazy again. Let's keep the hate speech out and name calling at zero.
So, in other words, if we permit gay marriage everyone will turn gay and humanity will die off. I mean, is gay sex that much better than hetero sex? Maybe I'm missing out.
|
No. That is your erratic summary and conclusion. I am only about pointging out that both forms of sexuality are not of equal importance in the way nature moves on, and that the one is dominant due to evolutionary design, and the other is a - statistical as well as biological - anomaly that does not do harm to the species as long as it'S prevalence does not exceed a certain mark - beyiond which it starts to effect the reproduction rate of a population in a given habitate.
I did not say somethign like that if we let poeope with arelips live, the whole population sooner or later would become harelipped.
But you stumbled over something although you did not want that. A side-effect of medical progress is that many people with a genetical disease that in earlier times would have killed them before they could have had children of their own (carrying the same defectiove gene), today survive and can have children. As a result we know that these defective genes spread thrpoughout the genepool, and survive. We know that because counting it out showed us that the share of individuals with said genetically caused disease has grown amiongst the total population, and they become older. For example, a higher percentage of populations are bleeders, than in earlier times, and they also become older. They have children which carry their defective gene - in earlier times, they often died from a small injury while being teenagers.
So, there are three forms of homosexuality: intended trying, neurotic reaction for example due to sexual traumatisation or isolation, and genetic. The latter could have a material effect on a population indeed if the respoijnble gene gets transported from one generation to the next. As far as I know, we are unknowing about this, we have not even idenmtified the assumed homosexuality-gene, or am I wrong there? Could very well be that I am wrong, I so far think on the grounds of that the genetical component is
just concluded on, but is not proven in hard evidence in a genetic screening. If the "gay-gene" indeed has been identified, let me know.
Maybe homosexuality is not caused by a defective gene triggering it, but a constellation of other genetic combinations that taken for themselves have different singular features, but in combination cause homosexuality as kind of a side-effect. But again: I don't know.