|
I don't think that if you were to measure the ratio of gays:straights throughout history that it would differ dramatically from our ratio today.
Greek pottery, Roman writings etc... refer to homosexual relations. If it's big enough to be mentioned in numerous texts (like the Bible where it's chastised and forbidden several times) then it must have been prevalent enough to warrant public attention. It must have been important enough to garner public admonition.
There are several references to homosexuality in ancient Chinese writings pre B.C. , Greeks and Romans are famous for homosexual writings and art, ancient Egyptians, The Koran all mention homosexuality and the Bible (of these I am the most familiar with) mentions it at least five times that I'm aware of. (Genesis; Leviticus; Romans; 1 Corinthians; 1 Timothy)
I also don't think that being gay is a genetic defect. If it's a population limiter (as mentioned above) then I'd say it's done a piss poor job of saving our natural resources. If homosexuality was as prevelent in ancient times as it is today (and I think it was), then the "gay" gene hasn't done a very effective job of culling the population evidenced in our exponential growth since recorded time. It seems that a gene that inept at fulfilling it's purpose would have gone the way of the Dodo bird and T-Rex and been replaced by a better gene. The ever popular "deformed sperm" gene for instance.
My opinion is that the Government shouldn't favor one over the other (marriage {church sanctioned} to civil union {state sanctioned}) and if said Government wants to extend privileges to marriage it should extend the privilege to the other. If folks want to banter about immorality, by all means it's their right. I just don't think that our Government should have the power to legislate "morality" a tenuous and relative term at best.
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.
|