Current Events > Doesn't homosexuality go against human evolution...?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Think about it. If evolution is our species constantly adapting so we can survive longer....wouldnt homosexuality prevent that?

You know, not being able to reproduce our species and all that.
---

Gays are awesome.
---

Micah_93 posted...

Gays are awesome.

Not saying theyre not. Love the gays!
---

Part of the gay agenda to make sure less ppl are created
---

Inhibits overpopulation
---

If evolution is our species constantly adapting

wrong right out of the gate bud. it isn't so much that species adapt, it's more that the ones without beneficial mutations simply can't hack the world and die.
---

inb4thelock.gif
---

Pancake posted...

If evolution is our species constantly adapting

wrong right out of the gate bud. it isn't so much that species adapt, it's more that the ones without beneficial mutations simply can't hack the world and die.

Well yeah. More favorable traits that benefit the species with reproduction and survival are what stick.

Homosexuality prevents survival.
---

Vindris_SNH posted...

Inhibits overpopulation

MFBKBass5 posted...

Pancake posted...

If evolution is our species constantly adapting

wrong right out of the gate bud. it isn't so much that species adapt, it's more that the ones without beneficial mutations simply can't hack the world and die.

Well yeah. More favorable traits that benefit the species with reproduction and survival are what stick.

Homosexuality prevents survival.

Homosexuality is a favorable trait because survival is no longer concern due to planet overpopulation.

Yeah, but evolution is far from a perfect process. It typically only evolves a species until it is well-suited to its environment. After that, if a common recessive mutation or commonly unexpressed gene does not negatively impact the general population of a species enough it may continue to be carried.
---

Homosexuality prevents survival.

not to the individual.
---

If homosexuality causes the extinction of species, how have humans existed for this long?

Do people like the TC think gay sex is new
---

Also lots of gay people have biological children
---

No because gay couples opt for surrogate mothers and sperm donors.
---

ssj3mike89 posted...

If homosexuality causes the extinction of species, how have humans existed for this long?

Do people like the TC think gay sex is new

This.

Also homosexuality is not unique to humans.

Also evolution is not a straight line into progress.

Also gay people can and do have kids (sometimes with 3rd party help, sometimes not).
---

Seriously, this is a dumb topic >_>
---

Why do people keep worrying about this shit.

Making it seem like life is solely about reproducing when that isnt the case.

In fact more straight people are refusing to have children in this day and age because they see the shit their children would be born into.

Why do people act like homosexuals cannot procreate? We have genitalia, there are plenty of ways to procreate without having to do heterosexual intercourse.

Tbf it's not like we are in desperate need of more babies
---

I don't know why I get the feeling but this comes off as thinly veiled homophobia.

Is TC a known troll?
---

No, it's rather a cause and effect, homosexuality is the effect of overpopulation. It's seen is closed environments in population experiments. Lemmings are the only mammal that seems to be immuned.
---

dolomedes posted...

Pogo_Marimo posted...

It typically only evolves a species until it is well-suited to its environment. After that,

lol what

To clarify, the most "rapid" evolutionary changes typically only occur when the ecosystem of their environment changes dramatically. This would mean either the species needs to evolve to fit the new climate and ecosystem, or new ecological niches are available for the species to diversify into as new species. If the local ecosystem remains stable over a long-period of time and the species is already well-suited for it's environment, it would mean a much larger percentage of genetic mutations would make the species less suited for it's environment. This is why we see "living fossil" species that have undergone only comparatively minor evolutionary changes for tens or hundreds of millions of years--By no coincidence most of these species thrive in a stable or isolated ecosystem such as the depths of the ocean or island chains far from mainland. These "living fossils" are shielded from the evolutionary pressures of either climate changes or the migration of competition.
---

Flockaveli posted...

I don't know why I get the feeling but this comes off as thinly veiled homophobia.

Is TC a known troll?

It is an excellent topic that evolutionary biologists still explore to this day. I don't see why it would be homophobic.
---

MorbidFaithless posted...

Seriously, this is a dumb topic >_>

Hardly. If he doesn't understand how evolution's quirks could result in something seemingly paradoxical, then it is a perfectly valid line of questioning. It is certainly a question evolutionary scientists have asked for a long-time, and a subject that has been the focus of a lot of research.
---

oh look, it's this topic again
---

Pogo_Marimo posted...

MorbidFaithless posted...

Seriously, this is a dumb topic >_>

Hardly. If he doesn't understand how evolution's quirks could result in something seemingly paradoxical, then it is a perfectly valid line of questioning. It is certainly a question evolutionary scientists have asked for a long-time, and a subject that has been the focus of a lot of research.

Seems like a weird subject to research. You act like it's impossible for homosexuals to have children when surrogates and sperm donors exist.
---

Blowjobs are against evolution. Ban all blowjobs

if evolution was perfect then transgenders wouldn't exist cuz you know, everybody would accept what they were born with.
---

Why do you think evolution means every human is perfectly selected for ultimate survival?
---

stems from prenatal hormonal conditions if i'm not mistaken
---

MC_BatCommander posted...

Pogo_Marimo posted...

MorbidFaithless posted...

Seriously, this is a dumb topic >_>

Hardly. If he doesn't understand how evolution's quirks could result in something seemingly paradoxical, then it is a perfectly valid line of questioning. It is certainly a question evolutionary scientists have asked for a long-time, and a subject that has been the focus of a lot of research.

Seems like a weird subject to research. You act like it's impossible for homosexuals to have children when surrogates and sperm donors exist.

Are you even reading the topic? This is about the evolutionary theory behind the prevalence of homosexuality in humans (and other species) despite it's prevalence being antithetical to the basic principals of evolution. I'm not sure if you're aware, but the practice of sperm donors and surrogates was not commonly practiced until extremely recently in our evolutionary history, and regardless of that the VAST majority of homosexuals are still born to straight parents.

It's odd of you to display such derision on the topic when you've literally demonstrated such an elementary level of knowledge on the subject.
---

On a basic level obviously
---

There's a fuck load of people born every fuck. We can stand to prevent some. Too much
---

Living past menopause goes against evolution. Ban all grannies