Homosexuality and evolution

[Guest shiloh357]

My cousin would be interested in this. He has debunked similar artilces in the past.

Does your cousin accept evolution as a fundamental law of biology?

Anyway, I think there are two different factors at work here.

1. Are their instances of animals being sexually attracted to other animals of the same sex?

2. Are their instances of animals having the kinds of emotional bonds that people can have towards each other?

The first is documented. The second would obviously simply be projection.

No, my cousin is not an evolutionist. He is a Christian and believes that God created the world. He uses science as a way understanding God's creation, not as a means of trying write God out of the origin of the world.

Secondly, he states that there is no homosexuality as it is a preference and so far there has been no convincing evidence of male to male or female to female preference or orientation. Animals are animals and projecting human motivations and preferences on to their behavior is junk science if that can be classified as science at all. That is why is it is stupid to talk about "gay animals."

MOST of what happens is nothing more than an attempt at trying to be the alpha male and is especially true with pack animals, like wolves, dogs, etc.

The bigger problem is that in promoting the idea that animals are gay, it tends to be used to show that homosexuality is a normal and acceptable form of behavior/sexual orientation. That is the last thing we need.

[forrestkc]

No, my cousin is not an evolutionist. He is a Christian and believes that God created the world. He uses science as a way understanding God's creation, not as a means of trying write God out of the origin of the world.

Secondly, he states that there is no homosexuality as it is a preference and so far there has been no convincing evidence of male to male or female to female preference or orientation. Animals are animals and projecting human motivations and preferences on to their behavior is junk science if that can be classified as science at all. That is why is it is stupid to talk about "gay animals."

MOST of what happens is nothing more than an attempt at trying to be the alpha male and is especially true with pack animals, like wolves, dogs, etc.

The bigger problem is that in promoting the idea that animals are gay, it tends to be used to show that homosexuality is a normal and acceptable form of behavior/sexual orientation. That is the last thing we need.

I am not sure how it would make it normal or not normal. For example, if one could show that some animals can be clinically depressed, it would not make clinical depression normal.

[ParanoidAndroid]

I tend to agree with the scientific studies that suggest homosexuality is a result of complex interactions between environment and genetics. There is no single cause of homosexuality. Certainly we are not responsible for the environment we grow up in and so there is absolutely no way that the vast majority of homosexuals could "control" the way they turn out (ie, "choice"). It is not a conscious choice, but we have no control of either our genetics or our environment and these act on our lives to create who we are. In most cases, these people have feelings for the same sex and could never fathom anything else - just like the majority of us heterosexuals cannot fathom anything except being attracted to the opposite sex. Most, if they choose to live celibate lives for Christ, will continue to struggle with homosexuality their whole lives. But there are some who, through an organic process of time, have been observed to slowly change (it takes years).

Though for all intents and purposes homosexuality is not a choice, acting on those urges IS a choice. For someone who wants to follow the Christian God, they have the choice to act or not act on sexual urges (as an unmarried heterosexual, I make that choice every day). Homosexuality cannot be "cured". This is a myth propagated by certain groups who don't understand it. For most homosexuals who choose to follow Christ, they will struggle their whole lives; though as mentioned, there are the few people who do change - this also is not a conscious choice but happens over many years.

As to whether it could affect our population growth, I would argue not. In a small society, there may be some merit to that thought - you need everyone procreating. However, as society's become larger, we no longer need the many children to propagate our species. Some people have even theorised that homosexuality is an evolutionary fail-safe built into our genetic code to prevent overpopulation (though I do not put much credence to that particular theory, there is some evidence for it - though I have never seen it in great detail).

The fact is that homosexuality is a small minority, it was a small minority and it has remained a small minority for millenia. Most people will remain heterosexual and continue to increase our populations. Those are my thoughts on the discussion and the thread topic. All the best

~ Regards, PA

[ParanoidAndroid]

Homosexuality is a dead-end street in every scientific scenario. It is unnatural in every sense. That is why homosexuals crave normality in the form of children and marriage...they MUST adopt some forms of natural behavior in order to perpetuate their lifestyle choices.

But isn't it the heterosexual world (being the majority) that has defined normalcy? It is within the heterosexual framework that children and marriage have come to mean so much. Homosexuality, particularly in the past, has been demonised so much that those who feel even slightly that way start trying to compensate by living a "normal heterosexual" lifestyle when they never should have gone down that path.

I wonder how many couples have split because one half of the couple married for the wrong reasons (to appear normal to everyone, despite their feelings).

I am confused by the phrase "the animal world in general" since there is no natural predisposition for homosexuality in the "animal world in general."

Actually, many species have exhibited homosexual dispositions - link.

Though of course, being in nature does not by default mean it is acceptable. Many things in nature (cannibalism being the best one I can think of) are also found naturally within the animal kingdom, this does not make it any more or less acceptable for me to murder and eat my work colleagues.

[ParanoidAndroid]

Homosexuality is a dead-end street in every scientific scenario.

I agree. That's why I am trying to determine the position of those who believe in evolution on this matter.

Since the scientific community has deemed homosexuality as "natural" and "genetic."

It is an incorrect assumption to suggest this, nebula. The scientific community has currently concluded that homosexuality is a complex relationship between genetics and a range of environmental factors. Take THIS ARTICLE, as just one example of many, which clearly states that there are too many complex factors to put it down to any particular thing:

"This study puts cold water on any concerns that we are looking for a single 'gay gene' or a single environmental variable which could be used to 'select out' homosexuality - the factors which influence sexual orientation are complex. And we are not simply talking about homosexuality here - heterosexual behaviour is also influenced by a mixture of genetic and environmental factors.

See the link for full article if you want to read it (and as I said, it is only one of many studies I could link).

[Guest shiloh357]

No, my cousin is not an evolutionist. He is a Christian and believes that God created the world. He uses science as a way understanding God's creation, not as a means of trying write God out of the origin of the world.

Secondly, he states that there is no homosexuality as it is a preference and so far there has been no convincing evidence of male to male or female to female preference or orientation. Animals are animals and projecting human motivations and preferences on to their behavior is junk science if that can be classified as science at all. That is why is it is stupid to talk about "gay animals."

MOST of what happens is nothing more than an attempt at trying to be the alpha male and is especially true with pack animals, like wolves, dogs, etc.

The bigger problem is that in promoting the idea that animals are gay, it tends to be used to show that homosexuality is a normal and acceptable form of behavior/sexual orientation. That is the last thing we need.

I am not sure how it would make it normal or not normal. For example, if one could show that some animals can be clinically depressed, it would not make clinical depression normal.

What I mean is that the gay community could point to the perceived homosexual acts of animals as supporting their view that it is a naturally occurring act and thus acceptable for human orientation and practice as well.

[Gauntlet]

Well, if that's the case, it goes back to my quesiton about what homosexuality does to a population.

Decrease.

However, we have to be careful about comparing ourselves to the animal population this way. Some animals in an overpopulated situation will begin eating their young. Not even China has advocated baby cannibalism.

Just you wait.

[OneLight]

That is pure baloney. I have a cousin who is a zoologist and has had to dispell that myth a number of times. The dogs are not attempting to copulate. It is an attempt to assert domination, an attempt to establish itself as a the alpha male.

That is what I have read also. There are no homosexual animals.

You could try Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity by Bruce Bagemihl in which around 500 different species are documented as having homosexual and/or bisexual relations. Or you could visit the New York Aquarium if you're ever in the area and ask about their "gay penguins".

I agree that this does occur among animals but it's based on the 'gay for the stay' behavior seen in prison inmates (I heard this explained in some documentary I watched). In other words, it's opportunistic. As soon as a female shows up (never heard of female animals exhibiting homosexual traits, although they may) they revert to instinctive behavior, as do most inmates. Homosexuality would be counterintuitive for an animal since it doesn't ensure the survival of the species. For man, homosexuality is an abomination, we all know this. Humans are the only beings satan has sought to deceive and corrupt and there's a good reason for this; we are the only beings with souls.

Humans are not animals. No matter what the animal world does, that makes no difference in the human world. Man was created in the image of God, animals were not.

Is this supposed to be an answer to my post? If so, I don't get it. Maybe you were answering something else???

It is meant for all who compare humans to animals. It's like comparing apples to oranges.

[nebula]

Homosexuality cannot be "cured".

You know (understand) not the Scriptures, nor the power of God.

[Gauntlet]

Homosexuality cannot be "cured".

You know (understand) not the Scriptures, nor the power of God.

If Saul could become Paul, why should the transformation of homosexuals to hetrosexuals seem farfetched?