Evolutionists, what are the "evolutionary advantages" of homosexuality?

a reply to: firefromabove

They are one way that overpopulation may be regulated in certain species including ours. Unfortunately we breed so much and so fast that their evolutionary trait hasn't been utilized properly.

Just an idea, I think it's vey plausible and it makes sense evolutionarily.

a reply to: firefromabove

There probably isn't any advantage. I read homosexuality occurs in every species. The higher the complexity the higher the frequency. And for human's it's about 2%. So in our country of 320 million that means we have 6 million homosexuals. They are not going to go away so why not just leave them alone. It's not like gay people are evangelicals. No one would ever subject themselves to so much prejudice and bigotry for no reason. It would be like getting an operation to change your skin color to black. Eff that!

Look at it this way. Homosexuals tend to make more money, they dress better, and their house are better decorated. So homosexuals raise the value of housing in the neighborhoods they live. The increase value of homes allows heterosexuals to have more successful lives in those neighborhoods. And thereby with their indirect contribution they further the species.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

went through the torturous process of having sex with a woman

Just wanted to make sure you used the right word there. Was it really torturous? I mean how could they have gotten it done if it was excruciating?

tor·tur·ous adjective characterized by, involving, or causing excruciating pain or suffering. "a torturous eight weeks in their prison camp"

I agree with your overall position on the topic though, just wanted to ask you about that little detail

originally posted by: firefromabove
If anything, homosexuals with their higher rates of AIDS (proven by statistics) pose a serious threat to any community

I do NOT agree with your opinion that it poses any kind of threat what-so-ever. Poverty is a bigger threat.

You wrote:

originally posted by: odinsway

Kinsey was a lunitic....a complete psycho. Read up about the guy before using him as propaganda.

Earlier I wrote:

But I'm guessing you're not interested in spending at least 17 minutes of your time actually learning something about the topic. You have already made up your mind.

I'm not even mildly surprised by the fact that I was right. You are not even a little bit interested in discussing the topic from a scientific point of view. You trying to hide your homophobia behind "evolution" as your shield. It's not working. You are not here to debate or listen. You are simply here to tell people that you are a homophobe.

Not interested.
Most of the human race have evolved to the point where they know a person's sexuality does not matter in any way or form. Others are merely descendants of Homo Erectus. And the fact that you're giggling at that should tell you in which group you fall.

a reply to: firefromabove

If homosexuality is a statistical inevitably, then clearly its not a good thing

Red hair is a statistical inevitability, is it a bad thing to be a red head and should someone be ashamed for having red hair? It's also a statistical inevitably that autism will occur. Is it a bad thing to be autistic and should someone feel ashamed for being that way? It's a statistical inevitability that some people will be able to lick their elbows and that's freaking awesome.

Not all statistical inevitabilities are bad or shameful and you assuming that shows just how far you thought into that notion, which is not very far at all. Gay people are still human beings and all human beings are different in all kinds of ways.

a reply to: firefromabove

It never evolved. It existed in its present form. It began there (as such, it IS... not has EVOLVED into)... continues on the same way, ends with its past and current form never-changing.

I liken it to a single definition of "air"...and not what kind of air, where it came from, how much of chemicals or lack of are in it...just the singular definition of "AIR".

But, that's IMO.....

originally posted by: firefromabove

They can't reproduce so exactly why did they evolve that way?

According to Darwin's hypothesis, what evolutionary "advantage" does homosexuality have?

How is it not the same as saying "sterility has an evolutionary advantage"?

If you can't reproduce, you can't evolve. And if you can't e evolve, you're a dead end and your genes will exit the gene pool.

Accordingly the continued diatrabe of your threads would lead us to ascertain that your opinion is the influence of a Christian fundamental creationists perspective.

Could you possibly enlighten the other team as to why your God "Yahew" created homesexuals? To be berated, stoned, and beaten in this life. Then in the after life their soul can be tortured and burnt in eternal fire?

Is there a benefit to the creation of homosexuals?

originally posted by: firefromabove

They can't reproduce so exactly why did they evolve that way?

According to Darwin's hypothesis, what evolutionary "advantage" does homosexuality have?

How is it not the same as saying "sterility has an evolutionary advantage"?

If you can't reproduce, you can't evolve. And if you can't e evolve, you're a dead end and your genes will exit the gene pool.

I've changed my view after thinking about it. At first I thought there was no evolutionary advantage. But now after thinking about it homosexuality could result in a HUGE leap human evolution.

I read homosexuality occurs in every species. The higher the complexity the higher the frequency. And for human's it's about 2%. So in our country of 320 million that means we have 6 million homosexuals.

Say homosexuality and sterility rates were increasing and as a species we eventually faced the real thread of extinction. For a self-aware intelligent species like ourselves we would be forced to take matters into our own hands. As a species we would double, triple, or quadruple our efforts in genetic engineering. The threat of extinction would be highly motivating. Eventually breakthroughs would occur allowing our species to genetically engineer every aspect of our own reproduction. We would eventually become like the extraterrestrials on Superman's home world of Krypton. We would be engineered to be genetically specialized and test tube grown.

So to answer the OP, homosexuality could lead to the greatest possible advantages imaginable.

originally posted by: firefromabove
a reply to: ColdWisdom

The person I replied to made that claim about homosexuality being a "statistical inevitability".

Ask him.

Here is a site that may help you with your quest.

God speed and bless you for being such a fine servant of the lord.

a reply to: network dude

It's funny how the people who are the most outspoken against homosexuality turn out to be one in the end.

originally posted by: myselfaswell
a reply to: firefromabove

Homosexuals didn't evolve.

They are simply a statistical inevitability, much in the same way that some people are born to never actually understand evolution and the evolutionary process.

LOL, except there is no 'complete understanding' of evolution because a key component , origins, is still a mystery. Unless they teach that in school, I'd say poofing life from nothing (religion) and poofing life from electric mud puddles are still only theories...

originally posted by: firefromabove

They can't reproduce so exactly why did they evolve that way?

According to Darwin's hypothesis, what evolutionary "advantage" does homosexuality have?

How is it not the same as saying "sterility has an evolutionary advantage"?

If you can't reproduce, you can't evolve. And if you can't e evolve, you're a dead end and your genes will exit the gene pool.

I can remember reading a set of studies several years ago in which rats were subjected to extremely high population densities. One of the first behavioral changes was the increase violence over all and an increase in cannibalism of the young. Then more hostility toward the females and homosexuality. Beyond this point almost all other social behavior broke down and total cannibalism began.
I am not saying the same would hold true in human society, just what was observed within an animal study. Even though, sometimes if seems we humans have to learn things the hard way.

I have read every post up to here and I am not sure that firefromabove has brought any religious connotations to this discussion. As a matter of fact it has been about evolution. Whether or not he has a wholesome opinion on the subject matter this thread is beneficial for people to read. However when we start pointing fingers at religions we lose that possible beneficial contribution.

Here's one for you.

Consider the Ancient Greeks. Homosexuality was widespread in Greek culture, culturally the norm. The Spartans were the most famous and obvious example. But all of Greek culture was pretty darned gay.

They were also immensely culturally successful.

The gay relationships created strong bonds amongst the male populace, made them better warriors which lead to better evolutionary successes.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: myselfaswell
a reply to: firefromabove

Homosexuals didn't evolve.

They are simply a statistical inevitability, much in the same way that some people are born to never actually understand evolution and the evolutionary process.

LOL, except there is no 'complete understanding' of evolution because a key component , origins, is still a mystery. Unless they teach that in school, I'd say poofing life from nothing (religion) and poofing life from electric mud puddles are still only theories...

origins of life has NOTHING to do with evolution. for all it matters to evolution, Zeus could've magicked the first life into existence.

quit being so darn ignorant.

originally posted by: firefromabove

They can't reproduce so exactly why did they evolve that way?

According to Darwin's hypothesis, what evolutionary "advantage" does homosexuality have?

How is it not the same as saying "sterility has an evolutionary advantage"?

If you can't reproduce, you can't evolve. And if you can't e evolve, you're a dead end and your genes will exit the gene pool.

Though it's a few pages in, and I haven't had a chance to read all replies(getting ready for work), here's what I believe to be the best answer to your question.

Population control.

Humans are animals. Just because we evolved to have the capacity of critical thinking(though we rarely use it), we are still animals. Even though we have reached the top of the food chain, we are still animals. What happens when an animal doesn't have any predators to cull the herd, so to speak?? They tend to over-populate. Homosexuality is one way to help prevent humans from over-populating.

I've pondered on things like this a lot, and at times have wondered if cancer is around as a way for nature to tell us to stop trying to live forever. I've also wondered if that's why we have socio/psychopaths living among us, as another way for nature to "cull the herd".

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: firefromabove

Gay people, unless they've had some form of genital mutilation, are indeed capable of reproducing.

Gay people my be capable of reproducing with another person of the opposite sex (which would be heterosexual in nature), but gay couples, are not! Anything remotely close is artificial. There are M/F couples who can't reproduce and they seek out artificial means. Just because a baby is produced doesn't mean the parents reproduced. It means they were assisted in producing a baby by artificial means. The birth may have been natural but the conception was not.

a reply to: firefromabove

What is the evolutionary advantage to posting this same thread every day?

originally posted by: Gaspode
You wrote:

originally posted by: odinsway

Kinsey was a lunitic....a complete psycho. Read up about the guy before using him as propaganda.

Earlier I wrote:

But I'm guessing you're not interested in spending at least 17 minutes of your time actually learning something about the topic. You have already made up your mind.

I'm not even mildly surprised by the fact that I was right. You are not even a little bit interested in discussing the topic from a scientific point of view. You trying to hide your homophobia behind "evolution" as your shield. It's not working. You are not here to debate or listen. You are simply here to tell people that you are a homophobe.

Not interested.
Most of the human race have evolved to the point where they know a person's sexuality does not matter in any way or form. Others are merely descendants of Homo Erectus. And the fact that you're giggling at that should tell you in which group you fall.

You are quite right. I dont care for or agree with your point of view and dont care to be brainwashed with false propaganda. We are all still decendants of homo erectus...so not sure what the heck you are talking about in those regards. The fact that we dont all just run around banging whenever and whoever we want is what makes us human and not poo flinging apes. Its called societal structure and it is needed.