You re picture of the species is modelled on very simple animal behaviour and im afraid its largely wrong. First its missing the specialization pressure. In a

You re picture of the species is modelled on very simple animal behaviour and im afraid its largely wrong. First its missing the specialization pressure. In a finite habitat, any species not afflicted by disease or predators, bumps repeatedly against the resource-roof in cycles of strife. Evolution, being the dumb, process it is, optimizes for that. So you get, within every population, neuro-subspecies that are heavily adapted to situations in this spiral. Some of these subspecies actually behave like you predict, because their environment is to unstable and longterm planning is a disadvantage, when your risk seeking behaviour makes you jump on a mammoth with a spear tomorrow. For others, who thrive in the more peaceful environment (post-conflict/diseases/disaster curve falling back into the habitable zone) they might benefit largely from producing societal byproducts. "Sexual-Deviants" which your post designated as a die out, have valuable properties for a society. They can form a third "power-pillar" upholding contracts between the different interests of "pump&dump" and "I-need-longterm-commitment". Now, this gives us something, called prediction power. And with it, we can predict, that hating non-heteros makes you a more useful creature for the females of the species, who then can choose you as mate and force you to go into the current active social-contract-cult, which will force you to commit. This "law-producing" biology is so useful, it out-competes the simple biology model, were it not for the resources running out, due to exponential hunger. I hope we are all grown ups here, who can talk about differences and issues, without freaking out. The whole topic gets really cool, when you start assembling social machinery from the different neuro-subspecies.