Originally posted by sigma: Of course you can argue that fact. Hell, there's not even anything to argue.
Homosexual and Asexual animals are created in nature all the time, and that's an outright fact.
As animal populations in regions increase, instances of Homosexuality and Asexuality also increase. It's Nature's method of population control.
If that is "an organism's sole purpose" than why are millions of people born every year without the physical ability to reproduce? Do they no longer serve a purpose in life?
I don't know about homosexual organisms, so if there are, then you have taught me something... But if there are, they must have another way of reproduction, as do asexual reproducers. I would, however, like you to show me where homosexual reproduction takes place if it does.
If you don't think that the purpose of an organisms being is survival of the species through reproduction, then tell me what you do believe it is? Yes, I am kinda asking for the meaning of life here, but I think from a biological stance that yes, they don't have a purpose to the species if they can't reproduce. Now please don't take this as me saying that humans that can't reproduce are worthless, I am far from saying that. However, if we or any other organism gave birth to an entire generation that couldn't reproduce, they would sure have a tough time surviving past that generation.
"Moore has also accused the American people of being the stupidest, most naive people on the face of the Earth. And after last weekend, he's got the box office numbers to prove it!"
