Monday, March 05, 2007

Intelligent design and homosexuality

Not sure whether I've posted this before, but the previous post reminds me of an interesting irony. I'll preface this by saying I'm going to address two reasonably taboo subjects (homosexuality and religion) fairly clinically. If it comes across as insensitve, I apologize.

Let's suppose homosexuality is genetic (I have doubts, but for the sake of argument). And let's suppose it's a yes/no binary thing (ie no bisexuals).

The question is: how do we evolve to have homosexuals? By standard methods, a homosexual couple cannot have children. So if you happen to believe in evolution, you'll recognise this as a negative selection: an evolutionary dead-end. Typically, such traits are breeded out. So homosexuality is not a stable endpoint of evolution. In a way, it is evidence against evolution.

An alternative theory of genesis (aka Genesis), "Intelligent Design", supposes we exist in our current state because Somebody designed us this way. As such, we are no longer subject to evolutionary constraints. It's simple enough to claim God designed homosexuals the same way He did everything else. Of course, the intelligent design crowd is too homophobic to ever entertain that homosexuals are the result of God's will.

I find it funny. Creationists have too much baggage to argue that particular weak spot in evolution.

Of course, there are explainations compatible with evolution. Homosexuality could be recessive, it could be non-genetic, incomplete, or selection could be overruled by societal demands. I hear societal stigmas have lead to a lot of homosexuals having families (Ted Haggard anyone?). If that's really the case, there's another irony. Making homosexuality a social stigma actually increases it's prevalence in the human gene pool, as insecure men crank out the kids to demonstrate their heterosexuality. Good stuff.

Anyway, the above arguments are so rife with assumptions, that they're obviously silly. But they are silly in an interesting way, and the more general question of how people become chemically attracted to others is worth more study. Genetic profiling and molecular mechanisms would make for some fascinating publications. I'm totally out of my league here, but I believe on a percentage basis there are more gay men than gay women. That's common for genetic traits that are X-linked. As the X chromosme is the one that determines gender, it would at least be an obvious place to start looking.

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a bit nit-picky, but it is actually the Y chromosome that determines gender (i.e. if you don't have a Y chromosome, you are genetically female. If you have a Y chromosome, regardless of the X chromosomes, you are genetically male).

3:49 PM  
Blogger Lanky_Bastard said...

OK, so noted. Anyway, I meant chromosome pair 23. I don't know whether it would be more logical to screen the X or the Y first.

For lesbians though, you'd have to do the X. That's lesbian XX chromosomes, not lesbian XXX (which I'm sure would also be a fascinating field of research).

8:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home