Actually, it is worthwhile copying a part of that website.
HOMOSEXUALITY: ITS GENETIC BASIS
& EVOLUTIONARY BENEFIT
RESCRÎPTUM ATHENADORÎ Nº 1: IN CULTÛS PRÆNÔTIÔNEM GENERIS
RESCRIPT Nº 1 OF ATHENADORUS: AGAINST RELIGIOUS PREJUDICE TOWARD SEXUALITY
Science has established that one of the most powerful influences on the behavior of living things is their drive to pass their genes on to the next, and future, generations. Many have seen in this a reason to label homosexuality as unnatural, and a further justification for making homosexuals the object of their hatred and derision.
However, this label of execration hides major flaws in the logic, facts and observations of those who use it. Not only is homosexuality natural, it bestows evolutionary benefits to the cultures in which it is allowed to function freely, in accordance with Nature's design.
Homosexuality1 exists in proven ratios in all mammal species. Studies, biological and psychological,2 have shown that homosexuality is a product of genetics, and that it is evidenced, among other things, in differences in brain structure and in individuals' responses to hormones. These structural and functional characteristics are different from those of both male and female heterosexuals. This shows that the brain of homosexuals is specialized for a particular purpose, in the same way that the brains of males and females are specialized for the roles each is, in general, to play in the future of its species. The question, the answer to which has either stumped previous investigators, or has been pointedly ignored, is this: why would evolution create and continue a situation in which it seems that genetic material is lost?
Only within the last thirty to fifty years has sufficient information been available to allow for an answer to this question.
In each cell in every living thing's body there are organelles called mitochondria. These mitochondria are essentially what enable life, for they are the 'refineries' in which each cell transforms the energy contained in glucose molecules into a form that the cell can use to power its activities. Without these mitochondria, cells would have no power with which to perform even the most simple tasks, much less to perform such complicated, vital things as, for example, the contraction of chemical strands to provide muscular movement.
Mitochondria contain their own DNA. This DNA is largely independent of the DNA contained in the nucleus of the cell.
All mitochondria are inherited from one's mother and only from the mother. Therefore, contrary to the view that all DNA is inherited equally from each parent, the fact is that more DNA is inherited from the mother than from the father.3 Each child is genetically more closely related to its mother than to its father.
Because of the pattern of inheritance of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, there is a possibility, however slight, that a woman will be as closely related to her siblings, and to her sisters' children as she is to her own children. There also exists the possibility that a man will actually be genetically more closely related to his siblings and to his sisters' children than he will be to his own. Statistically, these possibilities are small, but, given the fact that certain genetic mixes appear to be more inheritable-as shown by the amazing similarities one sees among siblings and their children-these possibilities are reinforced by the physical and chemical properties and behaviors of the chromosomes.
The organelles and activities behind this slight difference in per-parent genetic inheritance comprise one of the most vital parts of inheritance, for mitochondrial-DNA and its expression determine the base-level viability of the animated organism. If something inherits mitochondrial-DNA that functions at higher efficiency, or causes its cells to operate chemically more efficiently, it has bestowed a survival advantage at least as great as any that its nuclear-DNA can have bestowed.
Because uncles and aunts can be as closely related to their siblings and those siblings' children as they would be to their own (or potentially, more closely related), the path of genetic information through generations is far less clearly delimited than that previously assumed by theorists. This shows that to protect one's genetic heritage it can be just as effective to make sure one's siblings and their progeny survive as it is to reproduce oneself. Indeed, for a certain number of members of a kinship group, in times of material shortage, drought, famine or war, it may actually be more effective.
One would expect to find that this situation has found expression in evolution, that this opportunity has been taken advantage of by evolution. Indeed, it has. It is homosexuality. In what way has this evolutionary force shown itself, to perpetuate and reinforce the occurrence of homosexuality?
In early human societies, e.g. those of many of the indigenous Americans, homosexual members of the tribe were accepted into their societies and fulfilled vital roles as members of their tribe. They brought to their kinship groups an increased capacity for the production of food and other essentials, and a greater ability of that group to defend itself, while at the same time they did not increase the load on the vital supplies of the group, by producing children of their own.
The benefits produced by these individuals accrued most fully to the advantage of the homosexual's siblings and of those siblings' children. Thereby, the effect of the existence of these homosexuals was to increase the survivability of those most likely to be most closely genetically related to them. Homosexuality is an adaptation that augments the survivability of the gene pool most closely related to that individual. It is prima facie evidence that bearing offspring is not the only way Nature has developed for ensuring the passage of a majority of one's genes to future generations.
This same beneficial effect has perpetuated itself throughout the life of the human community. The most visible fulfillment has changed only slightly, in that it now more often occurs as discrete transactions and is economic in expression. When a niece or nephew inherits money from a 'bachelor' uncle, or she or he receives a legacy from a 'spinster' aunt, exactly the same process is occurring that transpired in those early human communities. The activities of that homosexual relative ultimately go to increasing the survivability of the kinship group, of the contiguous gene pool.
"Homosexuality is a genetic biological response to the need for greater gathering and concentration of resources for the use of family- or identity-groups."4
This augmentation of the viability of the kinship- or identity-group has only become more broad and pervasive in Western Civilization, in which homosexual members have stood as observers (look-outs, if you will) over the cultural landscape. They have absorbed that cultural experience, invigorated it, and emitted it in ever greater, ever more insightful forms, as the legacy of all members of their Civilization.
The augmentation of cultural power caused by the productivity of these homosexual members of Western society is evident from the earliest days of Classical cultures through to the present day. From Solon, Sappho and Socrates on, the turbo-charging of Western Civilization until it has become the single most dominant culture in the world is in no small way the product of the surplus of energy and insight provided by the homosexual members of this culture.
The physical and social expressions of homosexuality arise from needs and drives common to all mammals, indeed to most animals. These are the need for physical and emotional intimacy, the need for companionship, and the need for sex.5 Merely being homosexual does not remove the needs or drives also possessed by heterosexuals-the mammalian base of human animate nature does not evaporate and is not over-ridden. In fact, the continued expression of these innate forces further strengthens the realization that homosexuality is indeed a natural expression of sexuality.
The fulfillment of those human drives for contact and companionship dramatically increases the augmentation effect. Asexuality, denial or abstention each defeat all such effects, and cannot be considered viable alternatives to animate sexuality.
Homosexuals who form pair bonds are expressing the basic human need for devoted companionship, an expression that tremendously increases their ability to gain and store resources-resources that accrue to the benefit of their families, their friends, their society. Homosexuals free to establish such relationships, cross boundaries, link sensibilities and expand the knowledge and realization of other groups. Those in such relationships thereby augment the capacities and worth of their individual and combined families, their own groups, their own cultures.6 They increase and enhance the survivability of their contiguous gene pools far more than they would if they remained isolated or if they sequestered themselves at home within their families, and did not engage in pair-bonds and in community.
If one follows the development of life from its simplest forms, one sees a progressive expansion of mental capacity and capabilities. From the simplest forms one sees a (chemical-based) recognition of self. In a very few amphibian and reptile species the females have expanded from the self to attain a basic awareness of offspring, an awareness which has progressed to the recognition of family among some birds, and which takes full root among the mammals. Only among mammals, with their advanced mental capacity, does the realization of community finally emerge and develop.
Homosexuality is never found among species that cannot to some degree recognize family. It starts to appear, but is very rare among those species that have attained the realization of family but have gone no further. Its incidence rises with increasing recognition of community, to the point that it is most common among those species with the greatest mental capacity: primates and cetaceans.
The appearance of homosexuality is itself a marker of the advanced mental power of a species. An attempt to denigrate its existence is in turn a very obvious sign of an individual's, a family's or an organization's lapse into a weak, superstitious --reptilian-- mentality.
All the objections against homosexuality raised by male-dominated, patriarchal groups do not survive the sword of reason. Such disapproval is based on the illogic of personal prejudice, on religious superstition: fear, hatred and ignorance.
Some of the more unenlightened members of modern society have said that homosexuality is a disease, "like alcoholism". This is patently false. Homosexuality exists without external impetus; it exists without the introduction of foreign chemicals and without the infliction of external actions by others. Others have said that it is a genetic 'predisposition', "like lying and stealing". This is utter nonsense. It exists in animal species in which these actions-these "sins"-cannot occur.7 Unlike lying and stealing, homosexuality endows specific, long-term benefits. It is as natural as blue eyes, left-handedness, or the genetic predisposition to walk on two legs.
Religious objections to homosexuality spring from two sources. One is the ancient patriarchal warrior-clan religion on which several modern religions are based. In their clans it was every male's duty to breed, to produce more soldiers, and any who didn't were violating cult taboo: it was taken as a sign of non-male weakness, of "sin" against their warrior Father.
The other source of these condemnations has been the need of religious and political leaders, who, in trying to force their religion and its observance on the peoples of their communities, have created mythic polemics that attempt to denigrate and destroy the religious beliefs and practices of others. This is the origin of the myth of Sodom and Gomorrah, and of the opprobrious dicta of Saul/Paul.
Because denial of the rights and safety of homosexuals is based solely on religion, all hate crimes committed against homosexuals are crimes of religion. Each denial of homosexual rights is the illegal establishment of religion over and above the rights of the individual.
As all objections against homosexuality are purely religious in origin, expression and purpose, they must be relegated to the cults and mythologies from which they derive. They have no place in a logical, scientific, psychologically healthy life. They have no place in public law. |
