A brother brought an interesting idea to light the other day in conversation:
One of the agendas of the gay community is to wrest the responsiblity for being gay from the individual and let Mother Nature take the fall. They are not so bold as to use the "Product of the Environment" argument since too much would be made of their perverse, unstructured and ungodly homelives. The patently secular homosexual will unashamedly admit that he/she is "gay by choice." However, the pat answer for those in contact with the religous world is the tried-and-true "I was born that way. I didn't have a choice." And nowadays there is much scientific "evidence" to support this statement.
But can a gay man be athiest? Surely. Can a gay man believe in evolution and hold to the natural occurance of homosexuality? Not so easily. Two problems arise for the modern homosexual scientist, the gay evolutionist.
One. If homosexuality is a natural trait that has existed for 1000's of years, it is difficult to imagine a trait such as homosexuality surviving among evolving creatures. It has been shown repeatedly that even minor deformities or (to put it nicely) irregularities in animals can lead to isolation and ultimately pre-mature death. If evolving man did not isolate the homosexual Neanderthal, certainly that trait would have receded since it is inferior. Inferior? Homosexuality has lacked the ability to transmit the Gay Gene to even one generation. It just can't propogate.
Two. If evolution is continuing, it seems that it is necessary to exterminate the inferior trait. Thus homosexuality falls prey to the Machine. Survival of the Fittest.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi Jason,
I don't have any commentary on the gay monkey but I did want to know about possible dates for next year's trip to China. You mentioned June but because of work, I'll only be able to come in July. Let me know when in July would be a good time. Looking forward to our time together.
i'd like to shout a quick "Amen" eastward. i've been forced through various channels to study evolution (though mostly with respect to cognition and epistomology) and i'm reading a book now (slowly) by D. Dennett on evolutionary theory as it stands now. Whether evolution is the mode by which we were made or not, i couldn't possibly care any less than i do, but it does pose some awfully interesting difficulties for those who "defy nature" as you point out-- the very ones who most desperately count on mindless evolution for their salvation (oblivion). Ironic.
Post a Comment