Even if you leave religion out of the argument, sexual behavior not designed for procreation deviates from the norm. Right?
Yes, yes it does. Some thoughts on the matter...
Remember, the way the left tells it, conservatives are science ignoramuses. But the natural sciences are conveniently out the window anytime that the peculiarities of homosexuality are up for a discussion.
Because, for the sake of homosexual
politics, homosexuality is not a behavior...not a lifestyle choice...but, rather, something that they are born with. There must be a homosexuality gene that somehow completely defies the science of biological inheritance and genetic selection.
Wikipedia puts it thusly:
In the context of evolution, certain traits or alleles of genes segregating within a population may be subject to selection. Under selection, individuals with advantages or "adaptive" traits tend to be more successful than their peers reproductively—meaning they contribute more offspring to the succeeding generation than others do. When these traits have a genetic basis, selection can increase the prevalence of those traits, because offspring will inherit those traits from their parents. When selection is intense and persistent, adaptive traits become universal to the population or species, which may then be said to have evolved.
Regardless of what you believe about the "origin of the species" (and I will not permit the discussion to take a turn in that direction...get your own thread if you must), genetic selection is pretty much an undeniable fact. The "fittest" do tend to survive (although more and more "unfit" survive today due to technological advances and that is yet another discussion) more than the "unfit" as a general rule. If the environment of our society tends to favor certain physical and biological traits then we tend to get more of them. In a war, for instance, those who can run faster and who can fight better tend to survive and then contribute to the gene pool whereas those who can not, do not. Although it can also work the other way...I remember reading somewhere that the average height of a French person went down an inch or two because so many of their young and healthy men were killed off in WWI and WWII. Anyway, we all know the point here and that is that genetic selection is not fantasy but is established scientific fact. You get what you breed for.
And yet, we are supposed to believe that 1) there
is a mysterious and elusive homosexuality gene and that 2) it somehow...magically...reproduces itself from one generation to the next. Either that or we are supposed to believe that homosexuality is a mutation. That is even more ludicrous when you think about it. What is the mysterious cause of the mutation and why can't it be found and stopped? If there are any more "science" explanations for homosexuality I would be interested in hearing of them. Not that it matters, though, because these explanations have no more science to them than does a psychic reading. It's all pure BS.
I don't deny that some people are born effeminate. It does happen. Some girls are very masculine. That happens, too. Is there a scientific explanation for this and can there ever be, though? Not from a purely logical approach.
And that's where you totally lose the leftists. They are stuck on this one. If they try and look at this from a "science" point of view they can't prove their hypothesis...that people are born this way and that there must be a "gay" gene. They refuse to look at it any other way and that is because that "other way" is from a "spiritual" point of view. Those of us who do entertain that line of thinking...well, some of us...tend to believe that behaviors can be inherited, specifically...bad behaviors. For countless generations this phenomenon has been usually referred to as the "sins of the father." Or grandfather. Or great grandfather. Regardless of the generation, that is what it is, though...generational inherited sin. So there's that theory.
Another theory is that homosexuals aren't born but, rather, they are created instead. Something I heard several decades ago has always stayed with me, that "homosexuals don't reproduce so they have to recruit." The homosexual political lobby spends a tremendous amount of energy promoting the idea that pedophiles are predominantly heterosexual. Well, that may be...I don't know enough about the demographics to offer an informed opinion on that little factoid. BUT...what is common knowledge is that a staggering number of homosexuals get their start in sexuality at a young age and that it frequently involves an older partner. NAMBLA comes immediately to mind and that is an organization that the GLAAD people would probably like to make disappear as much as certain white southern politicians from years gone by would like to wish away the Klan.
The above two "explanations" are really not distinct but are more intertwined with each other. When you probe into the past of adult child abusers you frequently find that they, too, were abused as children and that closes the loop with the concept of generational sin.
But there it is. There you have it. Is homosexual behavior "natural?" I can't see how it is. Not objectively. And that leads me to another saying (a joke, actually) that I heard decades ago and even with today's new norms it still holds true...
Conversations That Never Happened...guy walks into a psychiatrist's office in a panic and says, "Doc, you gotta help me! I think I might be straight!"
