I guess all I am trying to point out is that its neither good nor bad. The fact that selection works differently in regards to humanity now that we can 'subvert the system' in some ways doesnt mean we necessarily become less fit. In fact, all the sick and diseased people provide us drive and opportunity to improve our knowledge and technology (arguably the things that will provide us with the best quality of life out of any living thing in existence)... this knowledge and capability ultimately lead to advances that allow more of us to live and reproduce.... the one certain metric of a species' success. From that point of view, 'subverting the system' makes us more fit.I'm not saying I agree with eugenics, or with denying homosexuals access to fertility clinics, but the aim of eugenics was to improve humanity by hurrying along natural selection. The aim of fertility clinics, artificial insemination, and surrogacy is to enable those who normally cannot have children to reproduce. This is contrary to the idea of natural selection.
Well, you're oversimplifying a bit.... we still don't know all the factors that cause homosexuality. It could be a mix of genetics, and environment. Could even be that the underlying genetics is common throughout the species and provides an advantage in the majority of environments (over zealous attention to personal hygiene perhaps?;P), but under the right conditions will lead to homosexuality. In that case, the genes will always be passed along. We simply don't know.This is kind of irrelevant when you're dumping your genetic material into a waste facility.
Like I said, I also have at least 3 friends who have gay parents, who were at one time involved in straight relationships before they 'came out'. So all the genetic material isnt necessarily getting dumped into 'waste facilities' even before the days of fertility clinics and sperm banks;P