Lets handle this one at a time. This one I have time for.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by highthief
Then every member of the Sambia tribe of New Guinea is defective? Because every male in the tribe lives as a homosexual for several years.
|
They are not homosexuals, but taught to have male-male sex if it’s the same tribe I'm thinking of. They learn it as boys but still dream of when they are allowed to have sex with women. Its not the same as being a homosexual in the true sense.
Quote:
|
Americans and Europeans are more "defective" than say, Arabs or Chinese, because there is a higher incidence of homosexuality here than in those lands?
|
Yes in terms of this condition. Many conditions are more common in one race than another. Due to the nature of arab culture I'd be willing to bet their incidence of homosexuality is higher than reported, I don't know the Chinese rate off hand but lets take it at face value. I'd be MORE surprised if there was no difference in races.
I see homosexuality as a birth 'defect' because it directly interferes with reproduction. Genetics doesn't care about what kind of person you are, if your genes die out and die out due to something in their makeup, it’s a defect.
This is a purely dispassionate scientific assessment of the condition. The next logical argument would be to ask if healthy heterosexual couples who do not have children are 'defective' and the answer depends on the reason they don't have children. If there is a genetic tendency not have children then it would qualify as a birth defect. They were born that way, and it’s a dead end for the line. Now my guess is that it is a psychological thing and a conscious decision. Its still a dead end but the same genes under a different social environment could have had 12 kids happily. The same can't be same for homosexuals who I think would be gay under any circumstance since its genetically linked.
Either one accepts the genetic component to homosexuality and if you have an understanding of genetics you can see where this would be a defect (there is an argument I can think of that would make it a possible benefit but I'll see if someone else comes up with that one, its weak but worth mentioning) or homosexuality is somehow psychological and therefore can be cured or prevented in children. That was the thought up until the late 70's and guess how well that worked?