Quote:
Originally Posted by spinelust
Hm, interesting... so does this mean the opinions of any non-heterosexual participant in this debate are inherently "flawed" due to this implied bias?
|
Yes, incredibly so, but that's not going to stop congessionaly hired shrinks from testifying otherwise. I was just bringing up a viewpoint that would arise should this whole she-bang happen.
-----Added 9/10/2008 at 02 : 06 : 19-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by girldetective
Since others have expressed my views and feelings regarding the first and last of the above quotes, let me address the middle one with What?! Homos will copulate just at heteros do, when/if they get the itch. What is it you mean when you say through science and allow? The first seems silly and the second dangerous. What are you thinking?
|
My thoughts were that if a person who was completely not attracted in the slightest to the opposite sex and did not want to reproduce biologically could be artificially inseminated (through science), allow was used in the 'make it possible' sense, not the 'give permission to' sense. That was all.
-----Added 9/10/2008 at 02 : 07 : 38-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASU2003
There is no way you could get everyone to want to fix it. But, I'm sure there are people that if there was a pill the mother could take to eliminate the chance of having a gay son they would do it. Why did I only say son? Because I think it is caused by a hormonal imbalance in the mother. Either a natural or chemical imbalance is affecting the development of embryos. And that would mean, too much estrogen and the boy will like other boys. Too much testosterone and girls will like other girls (although it could be too much estrogen too). And I would bet that more people would feel comfortable having a lesbian daughter than a gay son.
|
Very interesting, I had not heard this logic before.
-----Added 9/10/2008 at 02 : 18 : 41-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
no wait: i know-----let's "fix" people who think about "fixing" things they're uncomfortable with. attempts to "fix" things like that have resulted in WAY more damage than not attempting to "fix" things like that, so if there's a Problem, a Mutation, it's with that subpopulation who thinks that "fixing" this sort of thing is a good idea. and since it is a system requirement that everyone die, there's not a real problem with speeding the plow.
|
I'm unclear to whether you believe that I use the term 'fix' because I think there is something wrong with gay people. I used quotes because I don't believe there's anything wrong or needing to be fixed with being gay - but that's off point.
I'm fueling this discussion because if there is some gene discovered then we'll all be hearing these very arguments being made in the political world. Psychiatrists will be brought in to testify that the homosexuals aren't unbiased enough to make a decision, other Psych's will be brought in to say the opposite, people will scream "Eugenics, Eugenics!", and all kinds of hell would break loose.
So if you were directing sarcasm at me, you (probably) misunderstod my intentions, and if you were directing it at the argument, I misunderstood yours.