According to the lastest news from an article at 365gay.com today, "Uganda's leading Muslim cleric has proposed to President Yoweri Museveni that gays be rounded up and marooned on an island in Lake Victoria until they die." The statement was a result of escalating opposition to gay rights in Uganda following a plea by masked homosexuals back in August for basic civil rights. This opposition is frightfully characterized often by murders and threats commited by a Muslim Tabliqh youth "anti-gay squad." What's more is that last week's International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission revealed that the Bush administration has "funded groups in Uganda that actively promote violence and discrimination against lesbians and gay men."
Personally I find all of this very upsetting, scary, and perplexing. But at the same time I take a look at the idea of committing genocide against LGBT people and I find the whole thing rather ridiculous, and impossible! LGBT People are not an ethnic group that can be "cleansed," or even identified by any form or external recognition with any real accuracy, and most of all, no matter what theory of sexual orientation development that you accept (whehter it's genetic, by choice, developmental, etc.), all of them support the idea that The Gay will live on forever. The only way to get rid of it is to destroy the human population entirely! Under this philosophy, you could almost assume that LGBTI is really only one of two things (from a demographic perspective): a naturally-occuring advantage in the evolutionary cycle, or a naturally-occuring disease that cannot be eradicated in any way. I think if more people realized this, things would be different.
What do you think? email qlisted@gmail.com or comment!
3 comments:
I mostly agree, except with your false dilemma at the end - your assertion that homosexuality is either a necessary advantage or an incurable disease.
Maybe homosexuality persists in human beings simply because it doesn't hurt anyone.
Evolution is just a natural process, it doesn't have goals or intentional designs. It can't think and feel, and probably cares very little about who we have sex with or fall in love with as individuals.
Obviously I don't think it's a disease, but I also don't think it necessarily needs to have some grand "purpose". When you imply that, I think you are straying from objective science a bit and leaning more toward churchiness (religion). Churchiness concerns itself with the idea that there has to be some great, profound meaning behind things, other than what we as human beings impose on the universe.
Churchiness. Ew.
I think you misinterpreted what I said. I understand what you mean completely, but just to clarify what I said, when I made a reference to an evolutionary advantage, I wasn't talking about a special trait, or an advantage that homosexuals have over heterosexuals. I was talking about an advantage that homo sapiens (and most species as we all know) has as a species (which is why I said "from a demographic perspective"). Meaning, if we were to assume that "homosexuality persists in human beings simply because it doesn't hurt anyone," which is more or less what I believe, that can be interpreted as an "evolutionary advantage" because it is a phenomenon that still exists today and was not weeded out in the evolutionary process. It's like saying there is an "evolutionary advantage" to having pubic hair because all of the rest of the hair that used to cover our bodies no longer does...due to evolution, but it doesn't necessarily mean that pubic serves any grand purpose, which isn't something I ever meant to imply. Homosexuality, in this context, and in considering the species as a whole, is an evolutionary advantage as well.
Good for people to know.
Post a Comment