Off Topic — HabitableZone

Off Topic » in reply to God, penguins, gays, and ID

Non-reproducing members of a species

Darwin gave an example of an ant species that was composed of a queen, workers, soldiers, and at least three different kinds of non-reproducing types that did not appear to serve any particular purpose. Darwin suggested that if they were harmful to the survival of the species they would have been selected out long ago (they wouldn't exist). By inspection he thought one of the non-reproducing types may have aided the queen in the reproductive process, but it was inconclusive. It is hard to figure out every aspect of the behaviour of another species.

Consequently, I am inclined to give homosexuals an official role in society, equal but distinct from the status of married heterosexuals, if they can describe what that role is. Surely people are smarter than ants. Conversely, if they cannot describe their role then their contribution is not the same as married heterosexuals. In that case I am inclined to deny them any official distinction, such as gay marriage. I would define their behaviour as deviant, with as yet undiscovered, or undisclosed, medical cause(s).

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (72 posts)