XYZ, I'm gonna tell you one time to stop this hateful diatribe. Your words are absolutely inexcusable and are extremely hateful and inappropriate. Stop now or get the short end of the stick.
You have every right to a civil opinion and I won't censor that, but your venom is rampant and won't be tolerated any more at all.
Originally posted by It's xyz!
basic logic of homosexuality being against millions of years of evolution.
The fact that you have both straight males & females who abuse & neglect their own children. And also the fact that a large percentage of children are conceived unplanned kinda squashes your logic.
Originally posted by Esau Cairnunplanned conception and child abuse isn't exactly evolution is it?
The fact that you have both straight males & females who abuse & neglect their own children. And also the fact that a large percentage of children are conceived unplanned kinda squashes your logic.
I don't even understand why you mentioned unplanned conception, as if bonobos plan when they're going to raise children.
As for the abuse and neglect of a child, this is rather subjective. There are many MANY reasons why these things occur and are mostly socio-economically related.
And logically your point makes no sense. Straight males and females are bad parents therefore homosexuality can cause offspring?
Originally posted by Esau Cairni think you're missing the point entirely.
I'm just simply saying your point against homosexuals not being beneficial to evolution is a pointless argument. Just as people who have kids only to neglect or abuse them is.
Nobody procreates because they're worried about the evolution of our species.
Millions of years of evolution has survived well due to vaginal penetration from a penis to the point of orgasm and ejaculation. Yes, there are other ways we evolved, but the point we mustn't overlook is homosexuals, by definition, do not do this.
The act of biological reproduction over years of evolution is so ingrained in our genetics that over 99% of humans find the opposite sex attractive sexually. As is the case in the animal kingdom. In fact, humans are hyper sexual. Men stick their penises in funny places and women masturbate with funny objects, amongst other things....
This is evolution, and we would not be here without heterosexual sex. It's not an argument for reproduction, it's a fact of life. Heterosexual activity is key and crucial for our survival. We would not survive with out it.
Homosexuality is dichotomous to this act. Not only do homosexuals find their own gender sexually attractive, but they find the opposite gender NOT sexually attractive. Only in extreme cases do they reproduce. This is not trolling, this is just another fact. I don't know how well IVF and surrogate families hold up, probably healthily, but it is pretty extreme and I find it surprising that biology resorts to this.
I never really understood how homosexuality could exist in the gene pool when I was taught evolution. I can understand bisexuality or pan sexuality, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find that out at all. It means everyone has some form of biological sexual attraction to anything and everything and even everyone. At least, to some degree. But I can't conclude that.
On the other hand, if that were the case, and every straight person is actually bisexual, and every gay person is also bisexual, then the whole debate is actually meaningless unless some sort of social order is created for whatever reason.
I don't know what the ancient Greeks thought about homosexuality, perhaps they can tell you if it's beneficial to evolution or not.
Originally posted by Esau Cairni still find it strange for someone to not be attracted to the opposite sex. I just don't understand it.
Homosexual acts may not produce offspring but a good percentage of them are fighting for same-sex marriages & also the desire to raise a family ie: adoption.
That parental urge is akin to evolution.
Originally posted by Esau Cairnno, it really isn't. A man who has no sexual attraction to women or a woman who has no sexual attraction to men doesn't make sense given the amount of reproduction over millennia.
To each their own.
It's similar to guys being attracted to different races of women & other guys aren't.
Pandas are struggling to reproduce and they're dying out because they aren't reproducing. Homosexuals are not attracted to the opposite gender and do not leave their genetic material behind. There must be SOME sort of heterosexual attraction in everybody due to its biological and evolutionary advantages. Just like everyone has a pancreas and a spleen, we have penises and vaginas and sexual urges. Each to their own sure, but don't deny the biological disadvantage.
It's not the same as some men like black girls and some men like white girls. Homosexuality is not a race.
I think I see what you are saying man: the world has too many gay panda's.
Friggin Panda's, I remember this one gay panda wrote some truly awful Sam/Dean Winchester fanfiction. Wincest...these panda's can be sick.
Anyways on a more serious note I will point out that some animals even do engage in homosexual behavior. It's actually not just specific to humans.
Originally posted by SurturNow that's not what I said. 😂
I think I see what you are saying man: the world has too many gay panda's.Friggin Panda's, I remember this one gay panda wrote some truly awful Sam/Dean Winchester fanfiction. Wincest...these panda's can be sick.
Anyways on a more serious note I will point out that some animals even do engage in homosexual behavior. It's actually not just specific to humans.
Pandas are cvnts though.
And of course animals engage in homosexual behaviour. But they don't produce offspring by doing so, and most of them are bisexual. Social activity is social activity. Not wanting to reproduce, well that's confusing on a biological PoV.