I would like to add that in any organisation to be successful, different roles will need to exist. i.e. in a company, there has to be a leader, as well as people good at executing. The leader might not be good at administrative jobs doesn't mean he/she is a bad leader. The person bringing in top sales might not have leadership skills but that doesn't discount his/her importance to the company.
I am using the analogy to illustrate that in the world we live in, some people like homosexuals do not reproduce doesn't mean they are not supposed to exist.
There are heterosexuals whom by some genetic defect or illness, cannot reproduce too. Does that mean they're also unnatural?
Just because homosexuals cannot reproduce doesn't mean the human race is doomed. Because the reproduction is left to those who can. It's not as if by allowing homosexuals to exist the heterosexuals will cease to exist. They just have different roles.
Be it animals, plants or humans, evolution doesn't occur based on reproduction alone.
Some plants/animals evolve to be asexual. Unnatural? No.
Famous gay people like elton john, ellen degeneres , they have touched lives in different ways. Do they contribute to evolution? Think carefully.
What about a gay scientist who invents some cure to some disease?
People should think on different levels. Evolution does not equate solely to reproduction.
|