PratchettFan
Gold Member
- Jun 20, 2012
- 7,238
- 746
- 190
It does not stand up because you provide nothing to support it except surmise. I provided you with other theories just as plausible. It's not even a theory - just an untested hypothesis.
The support is in the fact that if a species suddenly went 100% homosexual, it would die out in a generation. Even a large portion of said population doing so would cause the population to dip below the replacement value needed for survival of the species.
If the object of an organism is to procreate, to continue its DNA to the next generation, homosexual desires are an impediment to this. This isn't making any moral judgments, its purely observations of fact.
You continue to provide surmise instead of evidence. An untested hypothesis is nothing but an untested hypothesis.
and your hypothesis that it is biologically normal is "just because I say so?"
This is a message board, not a sociology research journal.You are applying a higher standard to my opinion because you don't like it, nothing more, nothing less.
I can't have the standard "just because I say so" but you can? You are attempting to support an argument on the basis of science. If you want to do that, then you should use science and not unsupported opinion. If all you are doing is stating your opinion, that is fine. My opinion is your opinion is wrong. I need provide no evidence if you think you don't.
Lets go over the facts. Sexual organisms reproduce sexually, via two sexes, male and female. Since life wants to propagate itself (I don't think they have discovered a life form that through natural processes, seeks to eliminate itself) in behooves said organisms to have some mechanism that promotes sexual reproduction. That mechanism is an attraction between opposite sexes, thus promoting sexual intercourse, and thus promoting the continuation of the individuals DNA and the overall species. Removing sexual desire towards opposite sex partners inhibits sexual intercourse between said organisms, thus inhibiting promotion of the individuals DNA, and possibly the promotion of the entire species though lack of genetic diversity.
This is based on observation of how biology works, not morality, not supposition, but established observations. If you can find some persistent homosexual tendencies in other species that are NOT due to 1)lack of mating partners, and thus an outlet for sexual energy or 2) sexual imbalance where the sex of the organism actually changes, then I have established a logical chain of showing homosexual activity is not a biological norm.
You have presented a brief, generalized and totally superficial overview which does not constitute anything even slightly approaching a scientific study. What actual studies do you have to back up your position? Without this, it is opinion.