desert_storm Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 I just had an odd thought. What if it is nature's way to stop overpopulation by produsing more and more gays?
Andrew Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 But homosexuals want to be able to get married and have kids (adopted, or through artificial insemination). That doesn't help stop overpopulation.Although the subject is touchy. :P
desert_storm Posted June 19, 2004 Author Posted June 19, 2004 Yah, but they, themselvs don't produce offspring.
GUNWOUNDS Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 so you are saying that if the whole world went gay then the population would go extinct?Not likely... Just because Gays dont mechanically reproduce doesnt mean they are infertile.A lesbian female could have her eggs fertilized by a gay male friend. In vitro that is.so i would say homosexuality is just appreciating the same sex overzealously.A man can appreciate a male bodybuilder's physique
danielsh Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 A man can appreciate a male bodybuilder's physique
Caid Ivik Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 What do you think, that nature has a soul, an universal mind leading all its processes? Open eyes boy. World is a chaos, if there is no direct intervention of intelligent subject like human. You know what does it mean when we talk about civilization as "unnatural"? Homosexuality is just another twist of chaotic nature, illogical and irational. As whole nature.
danielsh Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 His theory might make sense if it were demonstrable that there was some kind of correlation between population increase and homosexuality. For example, if homosexuals were more likely to be born in large families. But there isn't any information to indicate anything like that, so it's just absurd.
Wolf Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 There was a study done with rats and overpopulation in a close environment. As the population of the rats grew relative to the environment, interesting things happened.1. Rats would sexually assault each other randomly. Even if they were of the same sex.2. Rats would assault each other with the intent to kill.3. Rats would assault each other with the intent to cannibalize.Each one of these things shows that, as population increases, the propensity for rape, murder, and mayhem, if you will, also increases. So, perhaps, Desert, you are correct.
Caid Ivik Posted June 19, 2004 Posted June 19, 2004 You forgot there is a little difference between rat and human... ::)
Wolf Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 Well, Caid, we'll find out, won't we? Think about it; because of technology, humanity has a far larger population than nature ever intended for it to have. And look at all the military conflicts we have going on right now. Rats, like humans, are mammalian social creatures. A lot of similarities between them. I think this study still holds true for human psychology, and I think that discounting it would be bad, among other things...
GUNWOUNDS Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 Well, Caid, we'll find out, won't we? Think about it; because of technology, humanity has a far larger population than nature ever intended for it to have. And look at all the military conflicts we have going on right now. Rats, like humans, are mammalian social creatures. A lot of similarities between them. I think this study still holds true for human psychology, and I think that discounting it would be bad, among other things...ya you arent kidding
danielsh Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 you know you love the worm Dan.I do! Nothing like a daily reminder that I can't be a normal part of society because people like y'all won't let me!
danielsh Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 wha? its called conservative compassion !!Yup. As in "conservative theory," "conservative philosophy," "conservative progress," and "conservative thought," it's a nice way of saying "nonexistent."
Acriku Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 What do you think, that nature has a soul, an universal mind leading all its processes? Open eyes boy. World is a chaos, if there is no direct intervention of intelligent subject like human. You know what does it mean when we talk about civilization as "unnatural"? Homosexuality is just another twist of chaotic nature, illogical and irational. As whole nature."Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators." - Richard Dawkins. Variation is random (perhaps as you say chaos), the survival of such is not.
nemafakei Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 Hm. Some studies suggest it might be more to do with the removal of some of the more aggressive and compeitive tendancies of certain memebers of society. For example, societies with such males are more protected against the possibilty of losing all males to competition (especially if there is a single dominant male who kills all other potential competitors for mates), conflict, or other dangers. Of course, there's still the obstacle of, ah, reintroduction...
Dante Posted June 20, 2004 Posted June 20, 2004 However Homosexuality does not have any roots in reproduction... Instead homosexuality has roots in the natural appreciation of people of the same sex.
Wolf Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 First of all, what's downright dangerous?Second of all, we're all wrong? Man, I thought that rat-study actually made sense, too.
Recommended Posts