Is homosexuality nature's way of reducing our population?

Page 4 of 5 [ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Fraya
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,337

03 Dec 2008, 7:06 pm

Holy necromancy batman 3 year old dead thread here people.

_________________
One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
-----------
"White Rabbit" - Jefferson Airplane

claire-333
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,658

03 Dec 2008, 7:17 pm

I know, and look at what they dug it up to say.

history_of_psychiatry
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,105
Location: X

03 Dec 2008, 8:33 pm

Yes, I think homosexuality is a mechanism of nature to keep populations from overpopulating. Sorry to the hateful religious morons out there.

_________________
X

IdahoAspie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 29 Nov 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 726

05 Dec 2008, 1:24 am

Homosexuals exist so that there are more adults producing goods than children. This increases the quality of life over the quantity.

A brother or sister with a helpful homosexual brother or sister in the tribe will gather more meat and food for their children rather then competing for it with their children.

Homosexuals are not eunchs, or asexual, for two major reasons. They are practice for straight people that will mate with a member of the opposite sex, and backup if the straight males are unable to reproduce, they can, with effort, reproduce.

Today homosexuals pay high taxes and help offset the breeders taxes so they can better feed, house, and educate their children. Homosexuals are also good for practice for straight people.

Gay couples are a simple human function that people want companionship and someone to relate to. It has nothing to do with being gay, it has to do with being human.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

05 Dec 2008, 2:03 am

I guess none of you read the article in New Scientist that explains the continued existence of homosexuality. Instead of being nature's way of reducing population, it is in fact the complete opposite. There is a gene that is expressed in women that make them more sexual towards men. Men specifically. Sometimes this gene is "mistakenly" expressed in a man, making them attracted to men too. Men have an equivalent gene that, when expressed in a woman, make her attracted to women. This gene is not selected against, since most of the time it serves to increase the population and thus the gene's frequency in the gene pool.

(and, for some reason, I am a toucan)

NocturnalQuilter
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Oct 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 937

05 Dec 2008, 4:40 pm

I have to wonder why it even matters.
My partner and I have 2 sons, so obviously the population didn't lessen from our orientation though I am more than certain it did benefit from it.

Again, I wonder why so many people think being gay is a reproductive dead-end. http://www.gayparentmag.com/

ThatRedHairedGrrl
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 May 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 912
Location: Walking through a shopping mall listening to Half Japanese on headphones

07 Dec 2008, 9:22 am

eamonn wrote:

The lack of acceptance of gay people and lack of a populated gay communties in the more traditional small towns could lead to gay people not "outing" themselves until they stay in a big city were it is easier could account for the lack of recognised gay people in small towns. In a small town people tend to rely on each other for socialisation more and if it is generally frowned upon why would a gay person want to stay there?

First thing I thought, eamonn. Small towns and villages can say what they like about the 'value of community', but I'm afraid when it comes down to it, that usually only means if you fit in with the prevailing viewpoint. As a pagan, I've found bigger cities much more hospitable to alternative spiritual views, and I'd guess the same is true if you're LGBT or politically radical or of any other non-conventional viewpoint.

Why people are gay/lesbian is not desperately relevant. Why so many people still treat them in a hateful manner might be a more interesting and useful question to answer.

_________________
"Grunge? Isn't that some gross shade of greenish orange?"

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

08 Dec 2008, 11:06 am

thatrsdude wrote:

The reason we have homosexuals on this earth is the same reason we have people of all minortiy groups, including us aspies- to make the world a more interesting place. That's why there's people of all types everywhere, to make the world part of what it is. 'Different' people fill in the gaps of what 'normal' people can't provide to society.

Yes, it takes all kinds of people to make a world. As my Dad is fond of saying.

When you get it down to it, what's more important than anything ele is the content of the person's character and the content of their minds. MLK said that, albeit in a different context. Would you rather someone be of a certain sexuality or a decent human being? Sometimes the homosexuals make better members of society than the straights. But gay or straight, you can always be a waste of skin douchebag. Everyone follow?

Averick
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

08 Dec 2008, 11:36 am

IdahoAspie wrote:

Well spoken.

monty
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

08 Dec 2008, 1:17 pm

hecate wrote:

there is a high probabilty that this is why nature creates homosexuals. there is evidence (new scientist magazine, years ago) that there is a higher percentage of homosexuals in highly populated areas. also, there is an increased chance of someone being homosexual the more older siblings they have, although i have known gay people who are the eldest out of their siblings / an only child.

couples in stable homosexual relationships are also the perfect solution for children who, for one reason or another, are unable to live with their biological parent/s.

There are more gays in cities because there is more social freedom in cities - in small towns, everyone is in everyone else's business and they repress behaviour deemed undesirable. So people who don't fit in tend to move to large cities, where the social network is looser.

There is a high probability that nature does not have the ability to consciously do anything - evolution occurs through blind mutation. Environmental stress might lead to developmental conditions that lead to more gays, women who have multiple children might have some of the biochemical switches in various positions that lead to gayness in later children, but that is very different from giving nature a personality and agency.

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

08 Dec 2008, 10:06 pm

FireFox wrote:

What about asexuality? Does it also exist to reduce the population?

Logically, yes. Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone was making babies with everyone else? It would not be pretty. It would be like India, only worldwide.

Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

08 Dec 2008, 10:10 pm

slowmutant wrote:

Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone was making babies with everyone else? It would not be pretty. It would be like India, only worldwide.

Thats exactly what christian fundamentalists want, starting right here in North America.

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

08 Dec 2008, 10:22 pm

Haliphron wrote:

slowmutant wrote:

Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone was making babies with everyone else? It would not be pretty. It would be like India, only worldwide.

Thats exactly what christian fundamentalists want, starting right here in North America.

Yes, there are certain religious groups which seem to be utterly preoccupied with baby-making. Mormons, I'm looking at you.

Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

08 Dec 2008, 10:34 pm

slowmutant wrote:

Haliphron wrote:

slowmutant wrote:

Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone was making babies with everyone else? It would not be pretty. It would be like India, only worldwide.

Thats exactly what christian fundamentalists want, starting right here in North America.

Yes, there are certain religious groups which seem to be utterly preoccupied with baby-making. Mormons, I'm looking at you.

The Mormons really arent even close to being the worst of 'em.....

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

08 Dec 2008, 10:57 pm

Haliphron wrote:

slowmutant wrote:

Haliphron wrote:

slowmutant wrote:

Can you imagine what the world would be like if everyone was making babies with everyone else? It would not be pretty. It would be like India, only worldwide.

Thats exactly what christian fundamentalists want, starting right here in North America.

Yes, there are certain religious groups which seem to be utterly preoccupied with baby-making. Mormons, I'm looking at you.

The Mormons really arent even close to being the worst of 'em.....

No? If they aren't, who is? Some other sex-cult, I guess ...

Tim_UK
Toucan
Toucan

Joined: 1 Sep 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 255
Location: Plymouth, UK

10 Dec 2008, 6:45 am

Sex-cult eh?! Where do I sign up? :wink:

_________________
Winter is coming.

Page 4 of 5 [ 67 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Jump to:

Is homosexuality nature's way of reducing our population? Post Reply New Topic

Is homosexuality nature's way of reducing our population?