It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Shouldn't this mean that according to natural selection and the homosexuals inability to create new members of the speciespretty much guarentee that the "gay" jean would have been bred out long before the present?
Acording to evolution and survival of the fittest
According to this principle shouldnt a genetic homosexuality be comletely ruled out?
Originally posted by Alesanjin
reply to post by HulaAnglers
lol are you serious?? If that isn't a really terrible joke, then, you definetely have something not fully screwed in properly in that head of yours.
Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by constantwonder
Darrwww, but oppression against homosexuals by certain political/religious/or ideological have forced gay men to marry women and reproduce to hide their orientation - thus passing it on! :p
NO, it wouldn't. There is no "Gay Gene" in the same fashion there is no "God Spot" in the brain. The factors which determine sexuality (and to an extent, sexual fetishes) are extremely varied and include both genetic, developmental, and environmental.
Please do NOT take this out of context, or erroneous interpretation. Homosexuality is not something that selection could remove, in the same way that Down Syndrome or Cancer would be removed. This means that the genes which contribute to sexuality also code for other environmentally beneficial traits which everyone shares and would be selected for. However, when activated or deactivated in certain configurations can cause the organism to develop with certain predispositions. This itself doesn't necessarily mean that a baby born with a homosexual tendency will grow up to be gay, but may lean towards bisexuality - or may only find women sexually attractive, yet highly appreciate the male form.
That is my best understanding of the matter, and the issue of causes a person to attracted to a member of the same sex as well as to (or to the exclusion of) the opposite is still under investigation.
And to clear up some confusion some people may have, a gene is not like a light switch that you can turn on and off. DonExodus2 on YouTube had an excellent video and source links which mentioned the subject of genes which are linked or multi-coding. I'll post it here if anyone is interested, but I cannot remember the title now so I'll have dig.
Survival of the Fittest is not an Evolutionary term. "Fittest" may be interrupted as how well an organism is adapted to it's environment, but it's far too easily misconstrued as heightened strength, size, agility, speed, etc. It's like saying "Humans evolved from monkeys". While that is true, there is a much, much, more to it than that, which if you happen to miss the context or don't know much about the subject will only lead to confusion.
Originally posted by Miraj
You make a good point. I always wondered that myself.. If it were caused by genetics, the genetics would be gone pretty quick.
I'm all for they should get rights, I don't even think that should be a topic if they should or shouldn't!