The same can be said about exclusive homoloveuality. Gay people are an evolutionary dead end.
If the entire species was homoloveual, then yeah. But that's not how it works. A tiny percent of a species being homoloveual doesn't hurt, especially if you consider that there's numerous other reasons that members may not be reproducing, a tiny percentage of homoloveuality really doesn't add much.
If a tiny percent of homoloveuality
was devastating to a species, then it wouldn't exist; natural selection would remove the species
Also, gays are still
capable of reproducing. And there are many who, either out of religious shame/pressure or simply not realizing/accepting they were gay, still obtained a relationship with the opposite love and had children
Also, here's a hypothesis I've heard:
First, background: Sickle cell anemia is a disease primarily affecting those who came from areas with high incidence of malaria. This is because while carrying two copies of the bad gene causes the disease, carrying only one gives some resistance to malaria.
Now, the hypothesis I've heard is that homoloveuality may have a factor similar: that two "bad" copies of some hypothetical gene might contribute to homoloveuality, only one "bad" copy may contribute some advantage to heteroloveuals.
