I'm not sure where to file this, so I'll put in under Sacred Texts, but it's very tongue in cheek - so much so that your cheek might explode and it's not intended to cause offence (to gay people anyway).

So here we go: "And Dogma Created Gays"

It's well known that evolution favours mutations that survive and to survive we have to replicate those mutations multiple times.

Gay people, by definition do not have sex with members of the opposite sex and therefore cannot pass the "gay" gene on so homosexuality should have died out millennia ago: yet it's still with us.

There can only be one explanation for this.

Gay folk are breeding!

And the only way they can be breeding is that, through the strict interpretation of biblical texts, gay folk forced to marry and have children against their very nature. If we were more tolerant, and let them be "gay" the gene would, in time, be expelled from the gene pool and we'd all live happily ever after.

There are even courses, run by Evangelicals, who claim to be able to cure people of their homosexuality!

Therefore, it was religion's dumb interfering that gave us gay folk!

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to take this knowledge; improve it and sew the seeds of angsts among the religious having a great time doing so.

Views: 223

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hey you got something there. It also explains why I have meet so many Gay ex-Mormons.
Ok you gay guys,head for the sperm banks...And don't dally!!!!
Actually,I have met some older gay men and women who did get married and had children, as as they got older,decided to divorce and come out.
I wrote about Gay Rights for a research paper. Since I'm in 11th grade English, I didn't have enough time, and it was only supposed to be like 5 pages and I managed to cut mine down to 11. Needless to say I didn't read as much as I wanted to, but one of the books I was reading was talking about this very thing.

He started with the exact same thesis, only, he used it to prove that if homosexuality could possibly be a gene, it could not work that way. After all, that would be admitting that gay boys have gay papas.

A lot of research of "gay genes" involves hormones of the mother. And that may not fly so well because people are extra politically correct as far as women are concerned.

Still, if anyone brings it up, its a really fun way to fight back. And as Christians continually have to backtrack their theories on homosexuality as a "sin" a "deviation" a "choice"... they may soon actually have to admit it's natural!
A serious point here, can anyone point me to passages in religious texts which are specific in saying that homosexuality is a sin ?
In the King James Version, Leviticus 18:22 is translated: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
It's interesting to note that the bible doesn't bother to forbid women from having sex with each other. They were so powerless that they had to get married and have children whoever they fancied, so it didn't matter!

I dunno why people, including people who wrote the bible get their knickers in such a twist over what people do in bed.
Yup...And they have to have a scape goat to use ti get their flock all riled up and gays are perfect in that role.
People didn't do that in beds - as we know them - in those days; and I rather suspect that it grossed *some* folk out then like it does now. That's where these ideas come from. Live and let live is a relatively new concept.
Same with paedos, apparently. The most vocal anti-paedophiles are often paedophiles trying to divert attention from themselves. We have to be careful though as this doesn't necessarily apply.

On the other hand, when it came to the Romans, I've heard it said that they had sex with people of all sexes and ages: the sort of things polite society would wince at (or has long established laws for) these days were completely normal to them.
No problem here, Daniel.

Yes, it was a rather "tongue in cheek to hard that it bursts" but the intellectual side of this argument is equally interesting and I'm glad someone has had the time to explore it.

If we make fun of a serious point by understanding the true ramifications of it, I expect we will always win the argument and that weakens the position of the people we oppose.

Strewth, I hope that was coherent... long day today.
I haven't even gone to introductions yet, but I have to reply: the religious aren't usually believers in a genetic explanation for homosexuality. They think it's a lifestyle choice. So they wouldn't be too flummoxed by this argument that they should have let gays go on their merry way and extinguish themselves in the Darwinian sense, would they?


© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service