Nature shows us that it is the strongest, quickest and smartest that survive. Time and again we can watch the discovery channel and see nature in its awesome beauty and grisly reality. Whenever a species over populates its range nature culls the herd whether by increasing its natural predators or with disease.
Humans are a natural creature. Can we view the same process in nature with us? Approximately 70,000 years ago, give or take a few months, it seems something happened and humans were nearly eliminated from the planet. How many there were before that time, their distribution or lifestyles we cannot say. We can see that out of however many there were, we all descend from one female.
Mitochondrial Eve. What characteristics were necessary for the species to survive and prosper? Was it a good respect for civil liberties and each other’s space? Was it their fine sense of ethics and the rights of the minority? Would these have been valuable assets to acquiring a mate and prospering or impediments?
We speak of ethics, ideals and freedom. Protection of the weak from being the prey of the strong in society. Your self-expression ends at the point of my nose. Are these the attributes of a strong vibrant natural specie group or, perhaps the sign of a weakened indulgent natural group on the edge of a culling. Spoiling its home with its own dung, too weak, feeble minded or ineffectual to be a vibrant asset to the evolution of nature. Is a culling due?
If we are strictly products of natural evolution, with no divine protection or guidance, then I put it to you: Is a culling logical? And if there is a culling, a mass lemming race, what will be the qualities that nature will look for worth passing into the new herd?
Oh, and just in case you think that the qualities that nature has provided you are valuable - how many off-spring have you passed those qualities onto? That's how evolution works; the polygamist in Texas is the evolutionary winner. And anyone with a nickname "Dangling Fury" would seem to have a great headstart.
Think about it.
2 comments:
Actually, as far as polygamy is concerned I have no problems with it if the women/men are of legal age, know the situation, and are free to leave on their own accord. I think the case in Texas has alot to do with statutory rape, people being held against their will and physical abuse, not just polygamy.
I am monogamous by choice, but feel adults are free to make their relationship choices. I support gay marriages, they are free consenting adults. I support transgender people, there is scientific evidence to support their cause. What I am against is pedofiles, rapists, and sexual slavery. These are wrong for obvious reasons. One is child abuse, the next is violence - not sexual, and the next is illegal bondage.
From the point of view of natural evolution, only the relationship(s) that produce fertile off-spring are relevant.
Post a Comment