Quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
Shaun, isn't this the cornerstone of liberal "religious" dogma? Aberations, deviations from the normal course of nature, do normally prove to be inferior. In the natural world, they seldom survive for long at all. Yet this theory, centered around aberations actually being superior, and surviving to reproduce, continues to thrive virtually unchallenged. Liberalism even defends it with a somewhat religious zeal. Which is it then; are aberations inferior or superior? Or is it all in the connotation?
|
Aberations from normal are very important. If aberations never showed up, we'd be in evolutionary stagnation. To say that they "usually" fail misses the point that when they're successful, they're
very successful.
Please note that I'm not advancing the idea that homosexuality is an aberation that's good for evolution. I'm not ready to back that one up (yet).
