Replies

If gays evolved that way then why didn't -- in the course of natural selection and evolution -- they also get different body parts that support their behavior?

Because there is no selective advantage for them (as individuals.) They didn't (in general) directly pass on offspring. The genes are passed through relatives. Therefore there is no selective pressure related to physical characteristics -- only to behavior. The selective pressure is to the group, not the individual.

Now you may say, well that is strange. Is there any other human characteristic that benefits the group rather than the individual, and where the characteristic is exhibited through behavior rather than as a physical characteristic?

Yes. There are many studies that have been done on the selective advantage of "altruism". In nature, this is where an individual will take a risk that benefits others in the group, but increases the risk to that individual. The open question has been - how is this behavior genetically determined, if exhibiting the behavior will reduce the chance of the individual reproducing. The answer is, it is genetically passed through that individuals relatives.

That doesn't add up.

If two heterosexuals must be carriers to produce the gay recessive trait then this is true of their offspring:

1 in 4 will be gay
2 of 4 will be carriers
1 in 4 will be neither.

Of those...half cannot reproduce a gay offspring -- one being gay, the other being a non-carrier.

Of the 2 that can pass it on....they can mate with either a non-carrier or a carrier, so, assuming the same beginning stats, they have a one in three chance of being unable to produce a gay kid, and if that's the case, they would only have a 25% chance of producing a carrier.

The carriers would then have a two thirds chance of mating with another carrier. Of those, they only have a 50% chance of producing another carrier.

So....of the total carriers, they have a 5 out of 12 percent chance of producing a carrier, that's 5 out of 18 for the reproducers, and 5 out of 24 children born. As this process continues the percentages will decrease the chances of being gay -- Quickly.

Repeat this process over thousands of years and the gay population should slowly die out.

If you go down the "all behavior is genetic" route, then why is ANYONE in prison? Do we have no choice in how we behave?

I forgot one variable: The one that is neither could have a chance of producing a carrier if they marry a carrier. But if they do marry one, it is still a one in four chance of just producing a carrier. And their odds of marrying a carrier, at the beginning....which should date back to the beginning of man....is only 50%.

Yes. There are many studies that have been done on the selective advantage of "altruism". In nature, this is where an individual will take a risk that benefits others in the group, but increases the risk to that individual. The open question has been - how is this behavior genetically determined, if exhibiting the behavior will reduce the chance of the individual reproducing. The answer is, it is genetically passed through that individuals relatives.

Okay, I went back and reread what you said. You were just giving an example. LOL Duh. It sounds very far-fetched to me. Where does choice, character, kindness, goodness, and stuff like that fit in? The existence of altruism just reveals the part of humanity that is made in God's image, imo. How do you explain the human spirit? How do you explain human love, sacrifice, and self-denial? We are much more than just a bunch of genes. The CHOICES we make are the variables that separate great men from average or below average men. That's not genetics, that's free will.