Here’s an odd thought: What if homosexuality actually IS compatible with natural selection?
Opponents say being gay must be a choice because natural selection would have killed off any gay gene or any predisposition to being gay a long time ago! But maybe that’s not true. (Haha, I wonder if these opponents are also creationists? Irony.)
Granted, so far there is no way for exclusive lesbian and gay couples to reproduce without outside help, so evolutionarily speaking, they are not furthering the species. While many homosexual couples wanting children use sperm donors or surrogates, this solution would still technically be considered heterosexual reproduction. But there are still many gay and lesbian couples who choose to adopt babies or just not have children at all.
Over-population may not be contributing to climate change, but it will eventually make co-existing on planet Earth pretty difficult, and scientists working towards moon colonies don’t seem to be progressing that quickly.
I would never use over-population as a justification for the death penalty, war, abortion, or house-hold child limits, but many homosexual couples actively choose not to have their own children. What if the complex logic of natural selection understands that if our species is to survive in the long term, even a small decrease in the production of hungry, space-taking, greenhouse gas-making babies is in order?
What if everything really does happen for a reason, even homosexuality? Though not necessarily the next big topic of debate, it is something to think about.
- Survival & Prepping – Does homosexuality have to be an evolutionary dead end? (disclose.tv)
- Is there a gay gene? | Head to head (guardian.co.uk)