The Bible argues that homosexuality is wrong, because it's a sin. But Darwin has a different reason. Darwin would not say homosexuality is wrong, so much as it's just an evolutionary dead end. An aberration in life. A Cul de Sac, a line segment going the wrong way up the backdoor without a paddle, so to speak.
From the LA Weekly:
Darwin, whose theory of evolution says that all life originated from a common ancestor, made the other frequently cited argument against homosexuality. The reason the tree of life is so varied is because reproduction is an inexact process. Mutations arise that either help or hinder existence. Helpful ones create new lineages; harmful ones die off. “Survival of the fittest” is an abridged way of saying organisms with mutations that increase the species’ chances of reproduction do better than ones that don’t.
But mutation alone doesn’t explain all the variety in nature. To address that, Darwin developed his idea of sexual selection. Sexual selection is meant to explain how things like a peacock’s ornamental tail — obviously a hindrance to survival (have you ever tried running away from a predator with a kite tied to your ass?) — exist. Darwin figured, simply, that peahens (female peacocks) must like the tail. In fact, Darwin supposes, the male with the biggest tail attracts the most females.
So, in Darwin’s theory of evolution, mutations that are not in the service of survival — as are speed, camouflage and opposable thumbs — must be in the service of attracting mates with which to propagate the species.
Which puts homosexuality, which is clearly not a reproduction-enhancing mutation, at odds with Darwinism. Which, in turn, has made strange bedfellows out of sworn enemies: Evolutionary scientists and Christian-right literalists both agree, for different reasons, that homosexuality is unnatural.
Now, while the rest of the country is grappling with the issue of gay marriage, Stanford Evolutionary Ecologist Joan Roughgarden is trying to untangle Darwin’s mess by publishingEvolution’s Rainbow: Diversity, Gender and Sexuality in Nature and People. Roughgarden’s thesis begins with the idea that since homosexuality is not a reproductive strategy, according to Darwin it’s an aberration that should die off.
But instead of deciding that homosexuality is wrong from an evolutionary standpoint, Roughgarden arrived at another conclusion: Darwin’s theory of sexual selection must be wrong. Traveling this path and others, her book marks the first time that a scientist has presented a cogent challenge to one of Darwin’s sacred cows.Now, that is fucking funny, isn't it?
Go read the LA Weekly interview with the genius Stanford Professor of, what the fuck is it? Oh yeah, Professor of Evolutionary Ecology and Gender-Queer Biogenetics Critical Theory.
And while you're at it, ponder the fact that this presumably Lesbian Professor's name is ROUGHGARDEN.
That's an awesome, awesome name for a dyke, isn't it?