Sadly, your argument is flawed because we all know that mutations or misdevelopments occur. For instance, if we take the health of humanity, we know that there are some who have imperfect hearing/vision/etc. Then there are some who suffer from rare (and no so rare) medical conditions. All theses are natural, but we don't deem them asnormal - or why else do we spend billions of dollars trying to cure them?
The fact that only 3-4% of the population is gay indicates that this condition - like so many others - is natural but not normal.
30 comments
Some diseases are rare.
Uhm, no. That’s not how it works.
"Normal" could be defined as what the majority is. So yes, homosexuality is not "normal" by that definition. But just because something is not "normal" does not mean its bad, not at all. I mean, to take an example, intellectual giftedness is only possessed by an even smaller fraction of the population. Therefore it's even less normal. But does that mean it should be eradicated from the genepool? Of course not!
In fact, going by your "mutations" argument, some mutations are even beneficial to a person, while not being normal at all. Such positive mutations lead to a species evolving into something better. Does that mean it also deserves to be bred out, simply because its not "normal"? No, it doesn't.
Trust me, "normal" is highly
Granted, as opposed to those examples homosexuality is not not beneficial to a person per se, but its not detrimental either. So why should we waste time, money, and effort to get rid of it?
We also know that there are some who have very good hearing/vision/etc, and some who have much higher IQ than most people.
Natural, because it happens.
I couldn't agree more with #1928949.
Fundies on CNSNews and the like so often use that like it's the biggest indictment you can use against someone or something, that's it's not NORMAL. Like, is that really your main goal in life? To be normal? I personally could be considered 'abnormal' in several ways, and I'm pretty cool with that.
"All theses are natural, but we don't deem them asnormal - or why else do we spend billions of dollars trying to cure them?"
Uh...we don't try to cure medical conditions just because they're not normal.
I am an abnormal. I have a high IQ, but am bipolar, suffer from ADD and numerous sleep problems. My kids are all on amphetamines to be able to focus at all. Point being, the advantage of the high IQ comes with the attendant mental illness in our case. I don't think I can conceive of choosing to give up intellect to be "normal." Just accept that a certain percentage is going to be different in one our or more ways and celebrate diversity,I say.
"The fact that only 3-4% of the population is gay indicates that this condition - like so many others - is natural but not normal."
Everybody is natural, nobody is normal.
@Grey Wolf:
Red-headed people are about 1-2%. Should we shun them as well for not being "normal"? Spend billions of dollars trying to "cure" them?
That’d be a waste of money. We all know that gingers don’t have souls.
(I have a ginger beard. I wonder what that says about my soul. Do I only have the top half of one?)
And yet, 100% of gay people come from straight couples. Strange, that.
Kinda annihilates your argument, Dope.
> Left-handed people are about 5-10% of the population. Red-headed people are about 1-2%. Should we shun them as well for not being "normal"? Spend billions of dollars trying to "cure" them?
Who says you need millions of dollars? Just tie the little brat's left arm to her chair and make her practice handwriting.
You think I'm joking, but that's exactly what happened to my older sister.
How large a percentage of Earth's population is non-Caucasian? It ought to be a majority, right? So, being white* is an abnormality and we ought to cure it?
* Yes, I'm white, but that's hardly an accomplishment by me; I was just born to parents with several generations of Swedish people in their family tree.
Being gay doesn't harm anybody, though.
In terms of natural selection the fact that such a trait has remained in humanity's gene pool through millions of years means that it has to have some positive benefit.
Ah, normal; a mythical condition that no one in the entire human race has ever actually managed to have.
Of course, that's the standard definition of normal. In fundiespeak, normal = exactly like them.
To be fair, homosexuality is indeed not normal. And I think if you really hate the fact you're gay, you as a person should be able to decide you don't want to be gay and try and cure yourself even if you will fail.
But at the same time, I don't see what's so wrong about not being normal, and to use normality as an anti-gay argument is bound to fail even more than an attempt to change your sexual orientation will.
Normal. It's a setting on my washing machine. I used it only yesterday. Be aware, the same genetic code segment that gives certain populations in Africa and parts of Asia resistance to malaria is the one that causes sickle cell anemia. So don't be too quick to declare you know what genetics dictates in the human population, and the benefits or drawbacks thereof.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
