• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If a Gay gene was discovered and could be detected in the womb...

joG said:
What good is a gay child, if you want genetic continuity by grandchildren?
Click to expand...

What a stupid question, not to mention bigoted. You are aware there are STRAIGHT folks, myself included, who DON'T intend to reproduce EVER, aren't you? :roll:

Newsflash; your child, straight or gay, DOESN'T "owe" you grandchildren. Deal with it.
 
WCH said:
Seems we need to be looking for epi-markers rather than genes. It also seems we may be able to change the chemistry of genes in order to eliminate homosexuality and other anomalies. [rather than abortion]
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with homosexuality, contrary to what backward militant religionists choose to BELIEVE. So there's no need to spend tons of money trying to find some kind of "magic cure" for it. The very idea is just plain STUPID.
 
Ocean007 said:
There's nothing wrong with homosexuality, contrary to what backward militant religionists choose to BELIEVE. So there's no need to spend tons of money trying to find some kind of "magic cure" for it. The very idea is just plain STUPID.
Click to expand...

What's good about it?
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
So what? That's about the same percentage as humans who have red hair. Should we "fix" their terrible anomaly as well?
Click to expand...

Exactly; it's the same kind of insane "logic" that is so often expressed by anti-gay extremists.

I wonder if they would like to find and "fix" the imaginary "gene" that makes a straight woman like me decide to be single and childfree rather than a "traditional wife and mother." No doubt that pisses them off as much as a child's being gay does. :roll:
 
Last edited:
Ocean007 said:
What a stupid question, not to mention bigoted. You are aware there are STRAIGHT folks, myself included, who DON'T intend to reproduce EVER, aren't you? :roll:

Newsflash; your child, straight or gay, DOESN'T "owe" you grandchildren. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with it? You are just searching for something to say, because you don't like the implications and haven't thought about it. So why, should a parent not abort a gay kid, if genetic grandchildren are desired? If you want a gay child, you abort the heteros. Where is your problem?
 
joG said:
What does that have to do with it? You are just searching for something to say, because you don't like the implications and haven't thought about it. So why, should a parent not abort a gay kid, if genetic grandchildren are desired? If you want a gay child, you abort the heteros. Where is your problem?
Click to expand...

That's an extremist view that doesn't take into account the fact that homosexuals are capable of reproduction and do, in fact, reproduce.
 
nota bene said:
That's an extremist view that doesn't take into account the fact that homosexuals are capable of reproduction and do, in fact, reproduce.
Click to expand...

Sure. But, while you are at it, why take a greater chance than necessary? If we keep going as we are and the abortion laws stay as they are? Well, there will be people that will be disappointed at brown haired girls and "Hey Presto!" will kill the cells before they can multiply.
 
Ocean007 said:
There's nothing wrong with homosexuality, contrary to what backward militant religionists choose to BELIEVE. So there's no need to spend tons of money trying to find some kind of "magic cure" for it. The very idea is just plain STUPID.
Click to expand...

I think this is an easier view to have today, as homosexuality is slowly becoming a more okay thing but what about forty years ago? Until very recently, being gay meant you were a pariah and isolated. Given the circumstances, I don't doubt that many parents would spare their kids that kind of hardship.
 
nota bene said:
That's an extremist view that doesn't take into account the fact that homosexuals are capable of reproduction and do, in fact, reproduce.
Click to expand...

To a lot of people though it's not the same as blood line.
 
joG said:
What does that have to do with it? You are just searching for something to say, because you don't like the implications and haven't thought about it. So why, should a parent not abort a gay kid, if genetic grandchildren are desired? If you want a gay child, you abort the heteros. Where is your problem?
Click to expand...

So, according to this bigoted "logic," it IS okay in the anti-choicer's mind to have an abortion after all...if it was discovered that the fetus had the non-existent "gay gene." Got it. It's quite hypocritical, but that's no surprise either.

However, as I said before, there are many STRAIGHT folks, women AND men, who have decided they never want kids either. So even a straight daughter could disappoint you when it comes to grandkids. Bottom line; you AREN'T "owed" grandchildren, by any of your kids. Deal with it.
 
Ocean007 said:
So, according to this bigoted "logic," it IS okay in the anti-choicer's mind to have an abortion after all...if it was discovered that the fetus had the non-existent "gay gene." Got it. It's quite hypocritical, but that's no surprise either.

However, as I said before, there are many STRAIGHT folks, women AND men, who have decided they never want kids either. So even a straight daughter could disappoint you when it comes to grandkids. Bottom line; you AREN'T "owed" grandchildren, by any of your kids. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

No. I do not think that persons that believe abortion wrong will think it is right in this case either. But the logic of pro-choice abortion for any reason, which is what we presently have in many jurisdictions, would be to have an abortion, if you didn't want gay offspring. Why, you can get rid of the kid for having blue eyes.
 
Lursa said:
A gay person has no handicaps except those forced on it by society.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Doctors only perform genetic testing for genetic defects/ handicaps.

So there would no reason to test for a gay gene even if there were one.
No testing for blue eys, brown eyes, red hair or blond hair either.

They do test for gender because some genetic defects will affect one sex more than other sex such as Fragile X syndrome is worse in boys because girls have Two X chromosomes and boys only have one X.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom