I find two ideas to be a stretch. First, that humanity began from a single female and a single male.
Well if you are an evolutionist you must concede that at some point the things from which humanity sprang were male and female, and that based on the biological scheme that allegedly just preceded humanity only one male and one female could ever produce another organism. So the point appears to stand whatever one's belief. It is clear that interbreeding humanity, as it is objectively defined by genetics, exists only by one man/one woman heterosexuality.
Second, that only the monogomous relationship is proper.
Well, the fact of monogamy certainly and objectively has more integrity with human biology than polygamy. Humans never change their biological composition. From conception to the grave they ever remain the composite of the same one man and one woman. Only monogamous heterosexuality reflects this natural truth.
Generally, species seem to benefit from spreading the seed around as widely as possible.
This is perhaps true for insects, dogs, cats and other multi-legged beasts, but hardly for man. It may seem on the surface advantageous to "spread the seed" as you say. But we should also consider the comparative helplessness of the human animal at birth to that of other animals. Then we see the advantage of monogamy and the responsibility it implies to human offspring. Advantage is quite a relative thing. Speed or superior numbers may seem advantageous, but depending upon biology and niche, it could be destructive. |
