|
How about, "Homosexual behaviors don't function to successfully pass on genes."
The problem with saying that it's "wrong" because it doesn't lead to reproduction is that that word, along with others that you have been using, especially something like "abnormal" is that language like that is the same language used by moralists to attack homosexuals and homosexual rights. You may carefully define your terms to try to make a fine distiction, but such distinctions are rarely made when discussing the moral and ethical issues.
"It's wrong because it doesn't lead to reproduction" is a very common argument used against legalization of gay marriage, and in the past laws against sodomy, which still were on the books in many states prior to 2003. You define "wrong" as meaning "not successful at passing on genes", but it's very easy to shift the meaning of that word slightly to the moral connotation and use the very argument that you see as a simple explanation of "the selfish gene" to support the oppression of homosexuals on moral grounds. Likewise, it's easy to shift "abnormal" or "unhealthy" in the sense of not promoting propagation of genes to mean "perverted" or "harmful to the individual" even though those may not be the intended meanings.
Gilda
|