Science Avenger: The Fading of Intelligent Design

(See here) where the Science Avenger crows about some victory he thinks "scientific" evolutionists have achieved against "creationists".

The Science Avenger evidently believes in evolution. Well, then let us examine just how much he is willing to bow to "science" and "evolution" and how willing he is to sacrifice the bullshit "liberal" viewpoint.

What does the Science Avenger think about homosexuality? Will you be willing to sacrifice the homosexuals for your viewpoint of evolution?

Do those that practice homosexuality do anything to further natural selection?

Does the Science Avenger preach evolution and then "encourage" homosexualty?

Homosexuality is a dead end in evolution. No argument that "scientists" can put forth to try and prove mankind should, from an evolutionary standpoint, accept homosexuality can withstand their own point of view. Homosexuality is a dead end. I can accept accepting homosexuality. I can not accept encouraging it.

I have a problem. By evolution us humans were given the ability to reason. Is it "reasonable" to encourage the dead end of evolution that is offered through homosexuality?

Can science and religion coexist? I think it can (because reality is reality) as long as science bows down to their own reality.

My God's reality is your reality. You just have to bow down to your own reality. If mankind is going to prosper (through evolution - God's reality) we have to discourage homosexuality. Homosexuality is a hindrance to natural selection.

Perhaps we can "tolerate" homosexuals just as we "tolerate" other failures of evolution. Get my point? I encourage that society accepts the failures of evolution. I am unwilling for society to encourage the failures.


Blogger Ward said...



Homosexual behavior is common in many animal species. As to whether this behavior has evolved to perform some kind of useful social function, like strengthening social bonds between members of the same sex, or whether animals do it simply because it presents another opportunity to do something they enjoy, is open to speculation.

Some evolutionary scientists say that human homosexuality may have evolved because of the benefits of having additional non-reproductive members contributing to the needs of the wider community. They say that as long as enough people continue to breed then there would be very little evolutionary pressure against homosexuality.

6/28/2007 03:58:00 PM  
Blogger Ward said...

... that last bit from:


6/28/2007 03:59:00 PM  
Blogger Little David said...

Perhaps what you say is true.

However consider this. If mankind faces a catatrophe such as that faced by the dinosaurs, would a non-reproductive element of mankind serve as a positive or a negative towards continuing existance of the species.

Homosexuality in the human species does not stand up to the test of "reason" or if you prefer "science".

I am aware that some examples of homosexuality beyond the human species exists within other species. However, in these species, the practice of homosexuality leads towards the dead end that it directs towards. Non reproductive sexual practices, to the exclusion of reproductive sexual practices, is an evolutionary dead end.

Do you believe in evolution? Just how many males (or females) in nature are allowed to reproduce if they refuse to engage in sex with members of the opposite sex of their species? Must we allow "human reason" and the arguments in favor of "complete acceptance" of homosexuality over ride common sense?

Homosexuals do not utilize their sexual organs in the way nature intended for them to be used (I will leave God out of it). I do not see why society should attempt to swim against nature and evolution by actually encouraging un-natural sexual acts.

I believe in tolerance. I draw the line at encouragement.

7/02/2007 11:50:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home