- 8,169
- 5,366
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2007
Originally Posted by ericberry14
SuperAntigen... my NT comrad... do you feel about gay marriage?
keep in mind that your answer may drastically affect how i think of you...
I'm all for gay marriage. Realtalk.
The main argument people use in support of the "gay-marriage" ban is the idea that ---> Marriage a sacred pact between a man and a woman.
Personally, I think that argument is 100% grade-A bull crap, especially when you realize that this is AMERICA, the United States of America--where(heterosexual) divorce rates fluctuate in the high 50%, and a man and woman can get married in the span of 5 minutes, by a guy dressed in an elvis costume,while sitting in their car, in a place rightly known as "sin-city". The fact that a heterosexual couple can get married in such a manner, proves thatmarriage is not as SACRED, in this country, as people would like to argue. In this sense, I believe that homosexual couples have every right to marriage astheir heterosexual counterparts.
...
Now science is a whole 'nother topic. As inferred in my previous statement, I DO NOT THINK OR BELIEVE, and niether is there scientific evidence to reputemy stance, that homosexuality is "natural" in nature. Now when I say natural, I use it in a manner that would be interchangable with suchdescriptions as "standard", "typical", "archetype", "model", "norm"...etc.
Does it occur in nature, yes, but is it the standard through which the great majority of organisms on our planet use to reproduce. Does it honesly adhere tothe evolutionary precepts first noted by Darwin in his Origin of Species.
And even in those cases where "homosexual" behavior has been observed, can you honestly say that, that is solid proof of it's "natural"existence. Be aware that, "animal sexuality and motivating factors have been and remain poorly understood, and the term has strong cultural implicationsin western society that are irrelevant for other species other than humans." Additionally, scientist tag animals as homosexual soley based on informationinferred from BEHAVIOR and often times, single observations of behavior. For an animal to be truly homosexual, they must exhibit homesexual tendencies in allaspects of their sexual behavior--> copulation, genetital stimulation, mating games, and sexual display behavior. THIS IS NOT THE CASE FOR MANY OF THESEREPORTED ORGANISMS...
But at the end of the day, the killing blow comes from "copulation". Remember, homosexuality = sexual attraction to members of the same sex. Canhomosexual organisms copulate, Yes. But then what...
Remember that, the goal of every organism is to increase its fitness-- which is maximized by how many of its offspring survive. This is the natural and thenormal way through which nature designed all organisms. Because, what's the point of "creating" an organism that cannot reproduce and willsubsequently die out. The natural/normal goal of all organisms is to reproduce and thus increase their fitness...
Now--Are homosexual organisms capable of reproducing offspring. And we're talking about direct fitness here, not that altruistic bull, because to MAXIMIZEyour fitness, you must directly pass YOUR genes into the future, not your sisters, or brothers...or any other related kin...
So again, are homosexual organisms capable of DIRECTLY reproducing offspring. Key word, directly. Answer is NO. And in this framework, because they cannotdirectly reproduce offspring, the cannot directly increase their fitness---> which is CONTRARY to the natural/normal/ nature-intended goal for organismswhich is to make sure that one passes its genes into the future.
From a biological point of view-- HOMOSEXUALITY IS NEITHER NORMAL OR NATURAL... (as intended by "mother" nature)
...
