Tuesday, June 2, 2009

evolution and homosexuality

Why is it that evolutionists are in support of Gay issues? [warning: Characterization following] OK, so evolution is used in support of Atheism--if God didn't create the world, then he must not be there. Atheism is often times used to reject religious morality or to defend personal morality which is in opposition to religious morality. That is to say, if there is no God, I can live as I wish, and since evolution is true, there is no God; therefore I can live as I wish [this is certainly not typical of all Atheists, though there are a number who have gone on record as having said such]. For most areas of morality, this line of thinking--though I obviously disagree--makes sense, at least in the construct of its own worldview. The two areas where it makes the least sense, and these are typically the most contested and sought after issues, are Abortion and Homosexuality.
The problem is not that Atheism cannot support homosexuality or abortion, only evolution can't, which is the usual support for Atheism. I will only comment briefly on abortion. Evolution of the species is based on natural selection and survival of the fittest. This means that one group must gain some advantage over those around them and must pass this feature on to subsequent generations. Thus, in an evolutionary sense, abortion is nearly the same as suicide. The same is true of homosexuality. By definition, homosexuals do not have offspring. Thus, from an evolutionary perspective, homosexuality is feeble. Furthermore, in an evolutionary worldview, reproducing, strong specimens should not try to protect the weak--the homosexual--in any sense of the word.

Why then do those who believe in evolution and the natural progression of the world so very often argue in favor of homosexuality and abortion/infanticide? Those things are least natural to survival. While I do not agree that evolution explains our origins, I do believe that bears us along through history, in a limited sense.

No comments: