Does anybody know what Darwinists say about homosexuality? It seems like it does not benefit the species because homosexuals cannot reproduce.
Not saying I agree with that perspective. Obviously, homosexuals benefit society in other ways. I am just thinking in terms of evolution. It seems like a strictly Darwinian society would not encourage homosexual behavior because it encourages behaviors that run contrary to the propagation of the species.
2
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
5 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.But homosexuality has no real negative externalities other than that. Bad adaptations are eliminated because they are deadly, one way or another. Disinclination to procreate is not a dangerous adaptation in our environment, and many homosexuals still want to be parents and figure out a way to accomplish it.
Psykozen
Level 5
Apr 6, 2019
0
So either procreate or promote children into maturity. So there is still a natural role for those who themselves do not procreate.
I think the weakness is more in the fact that that lifestyle does not promote the inheritance of it's genetic material. Although twin tests confirm some genetic proclivity, I think that relationship is minor and suspect that environment plays a much greater role. Just more questions that won't be answered until this issue becomes depoliticized.
RobBlair
Level 8
Apr 6, 2019
1
And we'd have no lobsters. I like lobster. But seriously, we have to question this, what is going on in a society, that is encouraging boys to be girls and girls to be boys, while making masculinity the enemy. It is social suicide, why is this happening, who's purpose does it serve?
purdyday
Level 8
Apr 5, 2019
0
Encouraging or permitting? Has it occurred to you that perhaps the boys acting "like girls" and vice versa would have been that way anyway, it's just that in the past they would have had to repress their identity? If it has, how do you know which it is?
@onthecontrary oh contraire, my friend 
am not against homosexuality, have no dog or bitch in that race - what I am strongly opposed to, is encouraging or persuading, minor children to make life altering and possibly permanent decisions about their bodies, before their brains are fully formed. It is abusive and politically driven, imho.
@purdyday I thought you were referring to effeminate men and masculine women, my mistake. But the vast majority of transgender children really aren't being encouraged or persuaded to alter their bodies.
A purely Darwinian-based society would also kill the infirm and mentally challenged. Even materialists don’t believe that because they don’t believe in Darwinianism as the ONLY factor in society’s fundamentals. Instead, it’s in concert with natural law or other philosophical constructions.
In a sentence: evolution is a fact neither positive nor negative, while morals are JUDGEMENTS that are made about those facts.
Great username btw!!
NaturalLaw
Level 4
Apr 5, 2019
0
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.