"I really can not believe that the rovers are still running at all." Thats because you're an idiot. ~ Central Park Zoo's gay penguins ignite debate Dinitia Smith, New York Times Saturday, February 7, 2004 New York -- Roy and Silo, two chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan, are completely devoted to each other. For nearly six years now, they have been inseparable. They exhibit what in penguin parlance is called "ecstatic behavior": That is, they entwine their necks, they vocalize to each other, they have sex. Silo and Roy are, to anthropomorphize a bit, gay penguins. When offered female companionship, they have adamantly refused it. And the females aren't interested in them, either. At one time, the two seemed so desperate to incubate an egg together that they put a rock in their nest and sat on it, keeping it warm in the folds of their abdomens, said their chief keeper, Rob Gramzay. Finally, he gave them a fertile egg that needed care to hatch. Things went perfectly, and a chick, Tango, was born. For the next 2 1/2 months they raised Tango, keeping her warm and feeding her food from their beaks until she could go out into the world on her own. Gramzay is full of praise. "They did a great job," he said. Roy and Silo are hardly unusual. Indeed, scientists have found homosexual behavior throughout the animal world. This growing body of science has been increasingly drawn into charged debates about homosexuality in American society, on subjects from gay marriage to sodomy laws, despite reluctance from experts in the field to extrapolate from animals to humans. Gay groups argue that if homosexual behavior occurs in animals, it is natural, and therefore the rights of homosexuals should be protected. On the other hand, some conservative religious groups have condemned the same practices in the past, calling them "animalistic." But if homosexuality occurs among animals, does that necessarily mean it is natural for humans? And that raises a familiar question: If homosexuality is not a choice, but a result of natural forces that cannot be controlled, can it be immoral? The open discussion of homosexual behavior in animals is relatively new. "There has been a certain cultural shyness about admitting it," said Frans de Waal, whose 1997 book, "Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape" (University of California Press), unleashed a torrent of discussion about animal sexuality. Bonobos, apes closely related to humans, are wildly energetic sexually. Studies show that whether observed in the wild or in captivity, nearly all are bisexual and nearly half their sexual interactions are with the same sex. Females have been observed to engage in homosexual activity almost hourly. Before his own book, "American scientists who investigated bonobos never discussed sex at all," said de Waal, director of the Living Links Center of the Yerkes Primate Center at Emory University in Atlanta. "Or they sometimes would show two females having sex together, and would say, 'The females are very affectionate.' " Then in 1999, Bruce Bagemihl published "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" (St. Martin's Press), one of the first books of its kind to provide an overview of scholarly studies of same-sex behavior in animals. Bagemihl said homosexual behavior had been documented in some 450 species. Last summer, the book was cited by the American Psychiatric Association and other groups in a "friend of the court" brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Lawrence vs. Texas, a case challenging a Texas anti-sodomy law. The court struck down the law. In his book, Bagemihl describes homosexual activity in a broad spectrum of animals. He asserts that while same-sex behavior is sometimes found in captivity, it is actually seen more frequently in studies of animals in the wild. Among birds, for instance, studies show that 10 to 15 percent of female western gulls in some populations in the wild are homosexual. Among mammals, male and female bottlenose dolphins frequently engage in homosexual activity, both in captivity and in the wild. Homosexuality is particularly common among young male dolphin calves. One male may protect another that is resting or healing from wounds inflicted by a predator. When one partner dies, the other may search for a new male mate. Male and female rhesus macaques, a type of monkey, also exhibit homosexuality in captivity and in the wild. Males are affectionate to each other, touching, holding and embracing. Females smack their lips at each other and play games like hide-and-seek, peekaboo and follow the leader. And both sexes mount members of their own sex. Some scientists say homosexual behavior in animals is not necessarily about sex. Marlene Zuk, a professor of biology at UC Riverside and author of "Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn About Sex From Animals" (University of California Press, 2002), notes that scientists have speculated that homosexuality may have an evolutionary purpose, ensuring the survival of the species. By not producing their own offspring, homosexuals may help support or nurture their relatives' young. "That is a contribution to the gene pool," she said. Janet Mann, a professor of biology and psychology at Georgetown University who has studied same-sex behavior in dolphin calves, says their homosexuality "is about bond formation, not about being sexual for life." She said studies show that adult male dolphins form long-term alliances, sometimes in large groups. As adults, they cooperate to entice a single female and keep other males from her. Sometimes they share the female, or they may cooperate to help one male. "Male-male cooperation is extremely important," Mann said. The homosexual behavior of the young calves "could be practicing" for that later, crucial adult period, she added. Scientists warn about drawing conclusions about humans. "For some people, what animals do is a yardstick of what is and isn't natural," Vasey said. "They make a leap from saying if it's natural, it's morally and ethically desirable." But he added: "Infanticide is widespread in the animal kingdom. To jump from that to say it is desirable makes no sense. We shouldn't be using animals to craft moral and social policies for the kinds of human societies we want to live in. Animals don't take care of the elderly. I don't particularly think that should be a platform for closing down nursing homes." What the animal studies do show, Zuk observed, is that "sexuality is a lot broader term than people want to think." "You have this idea that the animal kingdom is strict, old-fashioned Roman Catholic," she said, "that they have sex just to procreate." In bonobos, she noted: "you see expressions of sex outside the period when females are fertile. Suddenly, you are beginning to see that sex is not necessarily about reproduction."

At the beginning, I suppose:

Many evolutionists operate under the faith that evolution occured and it occurred purely through natural processes.

It is not "faith" if it is supported by MOUNTAINS of evidence, as evolution theory is.

No divine or other intervention has been involved.

This is not what most people who actually understand the science say. What they do say is something along the lines of, "There is no evidence of a higher power."

Any attempt to suggest teaching people otherwise is met with stiff and dogmatic resistance.

Again, there is no evidence of the divine, that's why it shouldn't be taught in science class.

It has not been absolutely proved that only natural processes have brought about our current situation, ergo faith is involved.

Science doesn't absolutely prove anything. Your saying it should belies a basic misunderstanding of what science is.

They may believe that all the evidence points to their conclution, but it is still faith.

Just because you (and others of your ilk) continue to say it over and over doesn't make it so. If, at a murder trial, the murder weapon is found at the suspect's home with the suspect's fingerprints on it, the victim's blood is found in the suspect's car, the suspect was seen entering the victim's home just before the time of death and seen leaving just after, and the suspect was the victim's ex-boyfriend, and the victim's friends said she had just broken up with him, is it "faith" to hand down a guilty verdict? If so, you have a very different definition of "faith" than I do (or any dictionary you care to mention).

Why do you set your alarm clock in the morning? Because you have faith that it will work, that the sun will rise, that your job will still exist, etc. You have no absolute proof of this, but you have pretty good evidence that these things will be so.

This is absolute bollocks and leaves me wondering why I even debate with someone like you. Not only would my alarm clock and my company suddenly have to cease to function overnight, the very solar system would have to cease to function. If you call that "faith", then it is a completely different kind of faith from religious faith, and the two shouldn't be compared as you are attempting to do.

But that is not to say that evidence for a creator is moot.

Please offer us some empirical evidence of a deity.

Some are so entrenched that they cannot see anything but what they want to see...

Now there's something we agree upon.

...but others of us can debate and listen and move the ball forward.

"Intelligent Design" doesn't move anything forward, it is a political movement consisting of nothing but empty speculation based on religion.

to all of you. FAGS.

You pathetic waste of humanity, why are you even alive?!?!?

No, wait, you aren't even worth the effort it would take to kill yourself. Just sit there, thinking very deeply about what a useless, stupid, vile, unattractive shitheel you are, how you are totally underserving of love, friendship or even ordinary human contact.

You are a betrayal of existence itself. Every proton, every subatomic flux of energy, you refute all this with your worthlessness, you scumbag, you ass, you subhuman fucksnot.

Keep thinking about what a disusting, ignorant wretch you are, how you embody all that is foul, painful, degenerate and repulsive. You sucknut, you sick fucking pig.

Think on this until the realization of your own unworthiness sucks your very being into itself, until you, and even the memory of you, every trace that you ever befouled the earth with your presence, is drawn into a void, and you are obliterated once and for ever.

You know it, you want it.

Get it in you.

Sincerely,
-Tourettes Troll.