Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Does Darwinian natural selection suggest...

that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?

Answer Question
 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 11:21 AM on Oct. 9, 2008 in Religion & Beliefs

Answers (12)
  • lol, I don't know the scientific answer, but I'm guessing that going by the Darwin principle, it would be. Homosexual relationships can't produce offspring without outside assisstance, so yeah, I suppose he would've considered it 'bad'.

    Doesn't mean I think it's bad, but whatever.
    caitxrawks

    Answer by caitxrawks at 11:56 AM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • According to natural law--yes, it is, because the whole purpose according to the secular mindset--is the propagation of the species----no matter how hard they try--they can't reproduce:-) And humans don't have the ability to "bud" soooooooo:-)

    Ronnie80

    Answer by Ronnie80 at 12:17 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • There's something called the "altruistic principle" thar suggests that there's sense in encouraging close offspring to have healthy children as a way of passing down genes. You see it with animals like meercats that live in lare groups. If danger arrives then one meercat will sound a warning to let the rest of the colony know it's time to hide. It draws attention to itself and that's considered a bad way to survive but it's ensured that it's brothers, sisters, cousins, nieces, and nephews have a better chance and thus (since they all share similar genes) it makes sure that favourable genes remain in the population.

    ~cont'd~
    Myantek

    Answer by Myantek at 12:39 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • In reference to this topic, according to Darwinism, once a women cannot biologically have children, she is no longer beneficial to the species.
    MommyRust

    Answer by MommyRust at 12:39 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • So when it comes to homosexuality, in times of stress, it's favourable that there be more adults responsible for raising offspring then having offspring of their own. Traits of homosexuality means that there are still pair bonds being formed but these bonds go toward hunting or gathering or protection of the rest of the population than in further straining resources by adding more offspring to the group.

    Biologically, homosexuality is very complex. There's definity a genetic link but there also appears to be environmental triggers. The answer seems to be that natural selection does not preclude homosexuality because it's important to look at the population as a whole rather than as individuals.
    Myantek

    Answer by Myantek at 12:44 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • That doesn't really explain homosexuality. Wild ungulates and domestic ones will not conceive when the environment isn't conducive to offspring. They don't just start breeding with like sex. The bottom line to Darwin is those with the best genes survive---and you have to be able to reproduce if you are to pass on your genes. 

    Ronnie80

    Answer by Ronnie80 at 12:51 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • I disagree Ronnie80, humans are group animals. What goes for the tribe goes for the individuals. If you can ensure the success of your sister's or brother's offspring it's as good as having offspring yourself.
    Myantek

    Answer by Myantek at 12:53 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • If homosexuality is genetic, it will likely continue to remain a minority trait. It's rare for any trait to be completely selected out of a gene pool. Good answers from a biological/ecological standpoint Myantek. Survival of the fittest and evolution act on populations and species, not on individuals.
    riotgrrl

    Answer by riotgrrl at 1:10 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • No, I don't see that. Homosexual sex does not produce offspring, so you might expect such a trait to become less frequent in a population as time goes by. However, we observe homosexual behavior in a number of other species, as well as in humans, after millions of years of evolution. Keep in mind, many individuals who engage in homosexual behavior also engage in heterosexual behavior, and do have children. It is also possible that the homosexual individuals who do not have children assist their heterosexual relatives in raising their kids, thus raising the survival rate of those kids and increasing the liklihood that those shared genes will remain in the gene pool.
    yarnjunkie

    Answer by yarnjunkie at 1:29 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

  • Oh, hi, Myantek. I see we meet again, on the same side of the discussion table! :)
    yarnjunkie

    Answer by yarnjunkie at 1:30 PM on Oct. 9, 2008

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.