The sheep that do that are retarded and fukked up from domestication.
Are you comparing them to homosexual humans?
Can pedophiles use the "born this way" argument?
- Thread starter Busted_Toes
- Start date
The sheep that do that are retarded and fukked up from domestication.
Are you comparing them to homosexual humans?
Proof that they are either "retarded" or "fukked up"? You can't assume that homosexuality is the result of being fukked up beforehand. You have to show that it is.
The fact that plenty of animals exhibit "off" behavior including reproduction issues in captivity that they wouldn't otherwise exhibit. And the fact that wild sheep don't exhibit that type of behavior. Should give you your answer
does it matter even if your vitriol was true?
Are we really going to sit here and act like a trait that has persisted for eons (homosexuality) in our species couldn't possibly have an evolutionary purpose? Since homosexual males are much less likely to reproduce, why would a trait that does appear to have some genetic inheritability continue to come up in our species without reproduction by the homosexuals who possess the "gene"?
Plenty of abnormalities happen without an evolutionary purpose. The fact that homosexuality has not taken over as the norm after thousands of years should tell you how advantageous it is.
And for the record I'm not trying to bash gay people. I don't think they are retarded and fukked up, but I think a lot of the stuff said in defense of homosexuals is just as outrageous as the bashing that goes on.
What are the evolutionary purposes of homosexuality that science has suggested?
At the basic core of all carbon based life forms there is the need to find better ways to reproduce and eat. men eating dikks couldn't possibly help in that, or could it?
there could be advantages to having 10% of the population being homosexual, those advantages wouldn't be the same if 50% of the population was. Genetic "abnormalities" eventually die out because the people with genetics that aren't beneficial die off. Yet homosexuality keeps existing. I'm not talking about individualistic advantages, I'm talking about collectivist, as a human race advantages.
"One possible explanation is what evolutionary psychologists call the "kin selection hypothesis." What that means is that homosexuality may convey an indirect benefit by enhancing the survival prospects of close relatives. Specifically, the theory holds that homosexual men might enhance their own genetic prospects by being "helpers in the nest."What are the evolutionary purposes of homosexuality that science has suggested?
At the basic core of all carbon based life forms there is the need to find better ways to reproduce and eat. men eating dikks couldn't possibly help in that, or could it?
that's just one theory. there could be a huge amount of evolutionary causes though.
"Group selection. Although the great majority of biologists maintain that natural selection occurs at the level of individuals and their genes rather than groups, it is at least possible that human beings are an exception; that groups containing homosexuals might have done better than groups composed entirely of straights. It has recently been argued, most cogently by the anthropologist Sarah B. Hrdy, that for much of human evolutionary history, child-rearing was not the province of parents (especially mothers) alone. Rather, our ancestors engaged in a great deal of "allomothering," whereby nonparents—other genetic relatives in particular—pitched in. It makes sense that such a system would have been derived by Homo sapiens, of all primate species the one whose infants are born the most helpless and require the largest investment of effort. If sufficient numbers of those assistants had been gay, their groups may have benefited disproportionately."
perhaps.
To me, it doesn't make sense that genetics that cause someone to not reproduce would be persisting... there has to be some other cause or benefit.
Uh, if being born with extra toes or one eye was an overall benefit to our race, the trait would've persisted. You're not going to "inherit" a gene from your mom to give you an extra eye or an extra thumb. But its possible to inherit genes that determine your sexuality.
The same can be said of being born with extra toes, or one eye.
Extra toes persist just as much as homosexuality does.
You are exactly right, although those who are drunk off of today's ever so popular false sense of "open mindedness" because they "accept" homosexuality, will try to disagree. It doesn't fit in with today's "pop-logic free for all moral outlook and if you don't think like us you're judging", mentality. But, you are right. It is all sexual deviancy, and it's all sick, or maybe one could say a sick-ness.
You have one sick individual who is sexually stimulated by molesting/having sex with children
one who is sexually stimulated by being with a member of their OWN sex
one who is sexually stimulated by being with animals(beastiality)
and one who is sexually stimulated by taking sex by force(rape)
.
At first i was like
this makes so much sense. fukking fagsss 
but now that i meditate on this. this isn't a valid argument.
what makes pedophilia, rape, animal beastality and other such acts fundamentally wrong is that they involve an abuse of power. They take advantage of a child who is defenseless, a person who has not consented, or a beast that cannot deal with human weapons. However, igay people -- while perhaps nasty -- do not engage in a fundamentally immoral act, presuming they have the consent of the other party or parties involved.
