Debate and Discussion

"Curing" Homosexuality using Hormones and Genetics.
Aurora Moon at 10:48PM, Dec. 31, 2006
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
I just read an disturbing piece of news article from here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2524408_2,00.html
Copied and pasted into the quotebox below:
News
SCIENTISTS are conducting experiments to change the sexuality of “gay” sheep in a programme that critics fear could pave the way for breeding out homosexuality in humans.
The technique being developed by American researchers adjusts the hormonal balance in the brains of homosexual rams so that they are more inclined to mate with ewes.

It raises the prospect that pregnant women could one day be offered a treatment to reduce or eliminate the chance that their offspring will be homosexual. Experts say that, in theory, the “straightening” procedure on humans could be as simple as a hormone supplement for mothers-to-be, worn on the skin like an anti-smoking nicotine patch.

The research, at Oregon State University in the city of Corvallis and at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, has caused an outcry. Martina Navratilova, the lesbian tennis player who won Wimbledon nine times, and scientists and gay rights campaigners in Britain have called for the project to be abandoned.

Navratilova defended the “right” of sheep to be gay. She said: “How can it be that in the year 2006 a major university would host such homophobic and cruel experiments?” She said gay men and lesbians would be “deeply offended” by the social implications of the tests.

But the researchers argue that the work is valid, shedding light on the “broad question” of what determines sexual orientation. They insist the work is not aimed at “curing” homosexuality.

Approximately one ram in 10 prefers to mount other rams rather than mate with ewes, reducing its value to a farmer. Initially, the publicly funded project aimed to improve the productivity of herds.

The scientists have been able to pinpoint the mechanisms influencing the desires of “male-oriented” rams by studying their brains. The animals’ skulls are cut open and electronic sensors are attached to their brains.

By varying the hormone levels, mainly by injecting hormones into the brain, they have had “considerable success” in altering the rams’ sexuality, with some previously gay animals becoming attracted to ewes.

Professor Charles Roselli, the Health and Science University biologist leading the research, defended the project.

He said: “In general, sexuality has been under-studied because of political concerns. People don’t want science looking into what determines sexuality.

“It’s a touchy issue. In fact, several studies have shown that people who believe homosexuality is biologically based are less homophobic than people who think that this orientation is acquired.”

The research is being peer-reviewed by a panel of scientists in America, demonstrating that it is being taken seriously by the academic community.

Potentially, the techniques could one day be adapted for human use, with doctors perhaps being able to offer parents pre-natal tests to determine the likely sexuality of offspring or a hormonal treatment to change the orientation of a child.

Roselli has said he would be “uncomfortable” about parents choosing sexuality, but argues that it is up to policy makers to legislate on questions of ethics.

Michael Bailey, a neurology professor at Northwestern University near Chicago, said: “Allowing parents to select their children’s sexual orientation would further a parent’s freedom to raise the sort of children they want to raise.”
Critics fear the findings could be abused.

Udo Schuklenk, Professor of Bioethics at Glasgow Caledonian University, who has written to the researchers pressing them to stop, said: “I don’t believe the motives of the study are homophobic, but their work brings the terrible possibility of exploitation by homophobic societies. Imagine this technology in the hands of Iran, for example.

“It is typical of the US to ignore the global context in which this is taking place.”

Peter Tatchell, the gay rights campaigner, said: “These experiments echo Nazi research in the early 1940s which aimed at eradicating homosexuality. They stink of eugenics. There is a danger that extreme homophobic regimes may try to use these experimental results to change the orientation of gay people.”

He said that the techniques being developed in sheep could in future allow parents to “play God”.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the pressure group, condemned the study as “a needless slaughter of animals, an affront to human dignity and a colossal waste of precious research funds”.

The tests on gay sheep are the latest in a long line of experiments seeking to alter the sexuality of humans and animals.

Günther Dorner, a scientist in the former East Berlin, carried out hormone-altering tests on rodents in the 1960s in the hope of finding a way to eradicate homosexuality.

In 2002, Simon LeVay, an American neurologist, claimed to have discovered that homosexual and heterosexual men had physically different brains. His tests on the corpses of gay men who had died of Aids were widely criticised.

I had this in response on another fourm outside of drunk duck where I found the new article via an thread:
Aurora Moon
Yeah. there's no real proof this could even work on humans. and John Who raises an good point–what's the point if it only works on male sheep?

oh yeah, that's right.. it's not really about homosexuality, it's about raising the male sheep's value to farmers… so they don't really focus on the females.

so if it was to work on humans… what would be the point of there being no gay men at all but there being lesbians? oh yes, that's right… lesbians are known to be much more “socially acceptable”. there's millions of men out there who thinks the very idea of male on male repulsive but they'll get turned on by lesbians. there's even women who finds that kind of logic Okay because they base it all on the aesthetics– Men are ugly, so the idea of ugly people together is ew. But on the other hand women are known to be much more aesthetically pleasing even if they're not a perfect model… plus they base it on the women's Psyche, how they're much “more inclined to love” than men.

crazy, messed up societal views.

By the way if you couldn't tell, I think that idea of using hormones to ensure that your children is “straight”, is sickening. It has nothing to do with me supporting Gay rights or anything, but based on the fact that if we allow that kind of thing then other things would follow– using genetics to ensure that your children will look “perfect”, to ensure no kind of flaw is ever found in your own children. and all that jazz. What next? we find some way to biologically dermine that the children will follow in thier parent's footsteps or to ensure that the kids are perfectly skilled at everything for some future jobs that thier parents wants them to have?
And how will we dermine what is “perfect” and what isn't in humans? Most imporantly, the Media has already an negative effect on how people has self-image problems, or even unreal expections of what “beautiful” and “perfect” is. So if this hormone thing was to lead to using such a thing to also dermine how your children looks, some people actually might end up wanting thier children to look more like celebrities or something. It also may lead to increased amounts of parents having VERY high expections of what thier children should be like.. unreal expections too at that.

I think parenting should be all about loving your own children, everything about them despsite the fact that they may have some “less-than-ideal” characterstics that you might wish they didn't have but still love them anyway.
this sort of thing may lead to parents being competely intorelant of ANY “non-perfect” characterstics in thier own children, leading to some damaged relationships.

Also, we as humans need to learn that nothing is perfect. that we may have to accept how things are, even if we don't like part of it. inducing our uncles, sisters, brothers, etc being gay.

So what do YOU think about this? kicking off this debate, new year style!
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:09AM
Black_Kitty at 11:26PM, Dec. 31, 2006
(online)
posts: 1,480
joined: 1-1-2006
I think the main problem with this study is that for it to be a study on what determines sexual orientation, they would have to branch out beyond turning homosexual rams into heterosexual rams. What about switching it around and try turning heterosexual rams into homosexual ones? Or make a bisexual ram? Or asexual? In other words, what about all the other possible sexual orientations out there?

How can you possibly do a study on what determines sexual orientation when the only thing you're looking at is turning gay rams into straight ones?

I mean the whole male thing instead of female thing could just be a sheep thing. (That's a lot of “thing” ^^;;; Sorry.) I just don't know enough about how sheeps mate to know for sure but it could be that rams have a more active role in the mating process then females. If you were to try the same experiment with ewes and all ewes do is stand around waiting for the mating to begin…well, the experiment would be a lot harder.
  
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:24AM
lothar at 12:31PM, Jan. 1, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
DUDE ! whos paying these idiot scientists to study this crap ?
they realy need to focus their attention on exploring outer space ! and when (IF) we do ever get to space there better well be some Lesbian astronaughts, cuz that's my fantasy !
but seriously; that's messed up when they try to skrew with nature !!! gay dudes and lesbians are a part of nature , so don't f*k with it !
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
Locoma at 8:49PM, Jan. 2, 2007
(online)
posts: 449
joined: 1-2-2006
lothar you're asking too much, people will study stupid things and devote their life to meaningless crap and that's a fact. The only solution to that is in the end of the movie Brazil (director's cut of course) I'm a bitter person

we'll all end up shaggin sheeps
hey… that's a fantastic comic plot!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:38PM
Vindibudd at 7:59AM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
Well the first problem is that they are operating under the premise that homosexuality is genetic. Let's get that part clarified before we start trying to breed out homosexuals through genetics. If homosexuality is genetic, and it is such a hard thing for people to be homosexual, then why is there an outcry about it? Oh wait, it isn't genetic, it's preferential. Oh well.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
ccs1989 at 11:13AM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,656
joined: 1-2-2006
Vindibudd
Oh wait, it isn't genetic, it's preferential. Oh well.

Where's your evidence for this? These tests only better support the idea that Homosexuality is genetic. This fact has not been proven yet, per se, but there's also no proof that it's just preference.
http://ccs1989.deviantart.com

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”
-Henry David Thoreau, Walden
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:38AM
lothar at 11:22AM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
genetic or preference is a tottaly rediculous argument, even if there was some sort of genetic prediposition to be gay , that doesn't meen that everybody that's gay is because they have some gay gene ! it's called free will and its what seperates humans from robots !
and another thing i don't get is why a lot of gay rights dudes are always trying to prove that gay is genetic , wtf? why would you wanna prove that, it's enuf to say people should be free to do whatever th F they want (insert comment about not hurting other people) without some ass telling them they can't because suchnsuch god says its BAD !
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
kingofsnake at 12:20PM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,374
joined: 9-27-2006
lothar
DUDE ! whos paying these idiot scientists to study this crap ?

I'm with you on this one. Although I think they'd be better off trying to figure out how to cure crap rather than explore space.

Exploring Space
Pros
Travel industry
stealing natural resources from other planets
we dunno what else really
Cons
Theres a whole lot of it
The pros have a sort feel sort of ethically askew

Curing Asthma
Pros
Improve the quality of life of millions
Cons
parmesutical industry loses some money.

“Curing” homosexuality
Pros
Sheltered, close minded people will have one thing less to feel uncomfortable about
Cons
Costs alot of money
Might not work
Waste of time
Oh, and taking away free will
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:15PM
Vindibudd at 1:11PM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
ccs1989
Vindibudd
Oh wait, it isn't genetic, it's preferential. Oh well.

Where's your evidence for this? These tests only better support the idea that Homosexuality is genetic. This fact has not been proven yet, per se, but there's also no proof that it's just preference.

What tests? All the evidence I need is the fact that people decide they are gay or straight all the time. Look this dude married and had 4 kids, but wait, he's GAY! So screw it. He is now running off with his gay lover. OR hey this guy is gay and been riding guys all his life, but wait, now he's STRAIGHT! So screw it, he's getting married.

Your eye color is genetic. Can you change your natural eye color without artificial methods?

Your hair color is genetic. Can you change your hair color without artificial methods?

Your height is genetic. Can you change your height without artificial means?

But Harry, Bob, Biff, and Deitrich all decide they are now going to be gay or straight.

I always hear about these studies and tests and no one ever shows me a link or source for them. IF it is genetic, then why is there an outcry about making people not gay? Can you tell me what parents want gay children? I guarantee you if you asked a couple if they wanted gay children they would all say no. Why? Because they want to leave descendents. That is the WHOLE POINT OF HAVING KIDS. You can't have grandkids if your kids are gay.

The way I see it, gay people have nothing to be worried about. If it is genetic, then they are proven right that they can't have a choice in the matter. If it is not genetic, then we will have an endless supply of people that like to rock it with the same team and they can run around fighting for “gay rights.”

And when you find whatever study, be prepared for me to consider the source and the research going in to it. So don't be hauling out something from FFLAG and expect me to just accept it at face value.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
ccs1989 at 2:35PM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,656
joined: 1-2-2006
Well, for one thing genetics is more than just an arbitrary set of Dominant and Recessive genes that code for traits. So there's no “Gay Gene”. It's more than likely that things like this are based on different hormones, possibly released during the birth of the child. It's possible that homosexuality is a trait which has variable expressivity, which may account for people thinking that they're straight at first but then becoming gay. If it is genetic it's definitely a polygenic trait, a factor of many sex-influencing alleles interacting in a certain way.

If these tests on rams prove anything it's that hormones affect this in a big way. Hormones are something that are hard to control, and if it affects something like sexual preference then that means it's no real fault of the individual.

That's throwing a few ideas out there. Genetics is a complicated thing, but so is the human mind. It could be either one.
http://ccs1989.deviantart.com

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”
-Henry David Thoreau, Walden
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:38AM
Eirikr at 7:56PM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,634
joined: 2-7-2006
So typical. Even if they did create it, it would make little difference. If someone didn't want to be gay, they wouldn't be. There's no need to waste resources trying to force someone to be straight to protect the “sanctity” of marriage.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:19PM
Aurora Moon at 8:02PM, Jan. 3, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Vindibudd, you have no idea how gay people think.

Okay, picture this scenario of an gay man:
if he were seeing gays prosecuted and harassed… also he lived in an family where most family members were very homophobic. Then the only choice he felt he had was to attempt to try to become straight at all costs. Trying too hard to get into women, going far as marrying an woman he had no real sexual attraction to, even having children with her.

That's why you hear about supposedly “Straight” man suddenly leaving women and his children to go off and have an gay lover…. they were NEVER straight to start with, they were just trying to be straight which they never were to start with. more than often those so-called “straight” men were only trying hard to be what their families and society expected them to be. then finally they realize this isn't really making them straight, it's only making them miserable.

Also, there are such a thing as people who were confused over their sexuality. people who are confused with their sexuality often makes a lot of assumptions about themselves that turned out to be wrong. like some teenage boys might think that they were gay when they randomly got hard-ons in the shower around other naked boys when all it turned out that they were just going though a hormonal process.. but they go ahead and do stuff with other males because they think they were gay and then later on when they get older they go: “oh wait a minute. I understand now.”

or they could be just be BISEXUAL. you know, people who don't care about the gender of the person? a lot of bisexual people are known to just have sex with one gender for a long while and then suddenly switch it around.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:09AM
Vindibudd at 8:25PM, Jan. 3, 2007
(online)
posts: 416
joined: 1-29-2006
Aurora Moon
Vindibudd, you have no idea how gay people think.

Okay, picture this scenario of an gay man:
if he were seeing gays prosecuted and harassed… also he lived in an family where most family members were very homophobic. Then the only choice he felt he had was to attempt to try to become straight at all costs. Trying too hard to get into women, going far as marrying an woman he had no real sexual attraction to, even having children with her.

That's why you hear about supposedly “Straight” man suddenly leaving women and his children to go off and have an gay lover…. they were NEVER straight to start with, they were just trying to be straight which they never were to start with. more than often those so-called “straight” men were only trying hard to be what their families and society expected them to be. then finally they realize this isn't really making them straight, it's only making them miserable.

Also, there are such a thing as people who were confused over their sexuality. people who are confused with their sexuality often makes a lot of assumptions about themselves that turned out to be wrong. like some teenage boys might think that they were gay when they randomly got hard-ons in the shower around other naked boys when all it turned out that they were just going though a hormonal process.. but they go ahead and do stuff with other males because they think they were gay and then later on when they get older they go: “oh wait a minute. I understand now.”

or they could be just be BISEXUAL. you know, people who don't care about the gender of the person? a lot of bisexual people are known to just have sex with one gender for a long while and then suddenly switch it around.

Oh, THAT'S what it is. It couldn't POSSIBLY be that homosexuality is just a preference. And are you saying that bisexuality is also genetic? Don't tell me I have no idea how gay men think. I know how they think just as much as you do or anyone else.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:42PM
Aurora Moon at 12:39AM, Jan. 4, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Because I knew people who had gay tendencies even when they were a kid… and when they turned 13-14 they'd realize that the feelings they had toward certain same sex were feelings of being attracted to people of the same sex.and that feeling never changed for them even as an adult. they didn't choose to be gay, they just happened to have feelings that they had no control over.

heck, I often hear from gay people that if they could choose, they'd choose not to be gay because of all the bullshit that society throws at them for being gay. they'd prefer being straight if they could.

Bisexuality one could say it's having no sexual preference in terms of favoring one over the other. they're just people who doesn't really focus on the gender of the person. I always considered the possibility that I was bisexual because I certainly don't care about the gender of the person in terms of sexual attractiveness. however I feel that I cannot call myself Bisexual just yet as seeing I've never actually done it with anybody yet.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:09AM
ozoneocean at 7:49AM, Jan. 4, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,963
joined: 1-2-2004
When starting of a debate like this you should really just provide a short summary in your own words of the original article, with a link to the rest- or references if it's unavailable. That's just a nicer, neater way to do it. ;)

The very idea that homosexuality is an ordinary inherited genetic trait is very slightly illogical, is it not? Such a trait would always die out whenever it cropped up. -Think about it. But if there are indeed biological influences, then they're far more likely to be in the form that CCS1989 suggests! Something more complicated, realistic, logical, probable, and vastly more interesting. If you're really insistent on simple genetic influences, you'd have to think in terms of conditions like Downs Syndrome: where the phenomena is caused by genetic a mutation that also renders the person sterile, but it does tend to crop up time and time again nevertheless. i.e- not an inherited trait, so much as a condition that could happen to any child depending on certain conditions.

But as for the issue of “gayness”, surely that's completely separate from homosexuality? You're talking about social and cultural modes of behavior when you use terms like “gayness”. There are no men who are born with some innate love of interior decoration, a predisposition to hairdressing, a penchant for Boardway musicals, and exceptionally high, breathy voices! There's a need to separate ordinary sexual preference from cultural conditioning. ;)

And on that issue, cultural conditioning lends yet another layer of interest to the puzzle! Could a person be socialised into being homosexual? Certainly there are many situations where this has and does occur: Alter the male/female balance significantly and the sexual drive seems to even things out in its own special way. We have many instances to point to with humans, other mammals, birds, even insects! -(prisons, military, convents, boarding schools, monasteries etc.) But there have also been cultural conventions that have made homosexual practices quite acceptable; think about ancient Rome, Greece, much of the ancient Middle East, India etc. These people were not often “gay” as we know it, but interacting homosexually was as normal to many of them as interacting heterosexually.

But what of people “discovering” their sexuality? Perhaps that has more to do with finding a social role with which they feel more comfortable? Oscar Wilde is always looked on as a gay martyr, but I think that idea of him is FAR too simplistic! Wilde was an extremely complicated and sophisticated individual, he fell very deeply in love with his first wife -something which is well documented- and she wasn't the only woman he loved. But there were also young men that he felt attraction to, and later on he fell just as in love with them: when Wilde actually fell in love, it was strongly, passionately and exclusively. His later relationships and his contemporary society by their nature absolutely precluded the possibility of him reconciling with his wife and very unlikely that he would develop another sexual relationship with a woman, especially at his age, with his health and social standing as it was… SO you see how society can have an influence on us and how we behave?

In the end I'd have to say that it is likely that we can have biological influences on our sexual preferences, but these are not tyrannical and are certainly not the last word as to how we will develop. Humankind is sophisticated and social; we would be remiss if we were to totally discount societal factors on the development and practices of sexuality!
-I do hold with Aurora's original conclusion to an extent… It's problematic though: if you have expectations for your child and you have ways of influencing them, you'll use it. Weather that's to make your child grow into a strong, well nourished sports person, phenomenal musician, mathematical whiz etc. And if you have a way of preventing them from having “problems”, you'll use that too: preventing dwarfism, cerebral palsy, Downs Syndrome, whatever. It's possible that a parent might look on a slight predisposition toward homosexuality in the same light.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:25PM
ccs1989 at 12:56PM, Jan. 4, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,656
joined: 1-2-2006
Locoma
maybe writing made up articles for a famous newspaper is genetic
damn, I want THAT job!

This is a debate forum. Posts like this are cute, but you actually have to be debating to make a post here.
http://ccs1989.deviantart.com

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”
-Henry David Thoreau, Walden
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:38AM
mapaghimagsik at 4:05PM, Jan. 4, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
ccs1989
Locoma
maybe writing made up articles for a famous newspaper is genetic
damn, I want THAT job!

This is a debate forum. Posts like this are cute, but you actually have to be debating to make a post here.

I do believe that snark is a competely valid debate tactic, and while the above might not be the most effective use of snark (a form of biting sarcasm), I would politely disagree with our beloved mod.

If you want, we can start a whole new debate topic about it.

I do believe that sexual preference is genetic. I would like to point out that pedopheila is also genetic but in no way do I put gays or lesbians on the same level as pedophiles. I just point out that there are other situations where sexual preference is genetic and uncurable even in those instances we wish we could cure.

At the same time, there are portions of our preference which *are* choice, though I think the crude parameters are genetic. I like shorter hair over longer hair. I think that's preference, but damned if I know where it comes from.

So who we like to snuggle with and their traits are a mix of genetics and preference, which is where I think a lot of people get tripped up.

I'd also like to add to this confusing mix is that sex is a potpourri of cultural, emotional, physical, and mental issues. Some people like power, some people like to be dominated. Kinks, quirks, fetishes, and things that drive us crazy abound. As Eliot said, “mixing memory and desire”.

I don't think sexual preference is a binary issue. I have nothing to back this up, but I throw it out for comment. I do believe there are people who can find both genders sexy and have fun, energetic sex with both. I also think there are people who don't have much in terms of a libido, and those with way too much.

So, like religion, you can make the teams as coarse or as fine-grained as you want, all the way down to “I love men with dark hair and blue eyes who are slightly unshaven and smell vaguely of cotton candy.”



last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
Locoma at 8:41PM, Jan. 4, 2007
(online)
posts: 449
joined: 1-2-2006
ccs1989
This is a debate forum. Posts like this are cute, but you actually have to be debating to make a post here.

Sorry, that's the best I can do in this kind of category, I don't have a debate english level, I would be hours trying to figure how to translate my thoughts to english, and probably I would be misunderstood. I will have fun reading it, though.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:38PM
Phantom Penguin at 5:12AM, Jan. 5, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,075
joined: 1-6-2006
Its probably the same scientists people use to show proof that global warming doesn't exist.
I mean does anyone remember when some scientist were payed to say ciggeretes weren't bad for you?

I don't know if its genetic or just how someone feels there is supposed ‘proof’ for both sides. Can you breed the gay out of something? The real question is why would anyone even want to start that experiment.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:42PM
Aurora Moon at 7:16AM, Jan. 5, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Phantom Penguin
The real question is why would anyone even want to start that experiment.

keep in mind that there's actually morons out there who thinks that humans need to breed more, in order to populate the earth more because they think that the earth is dangerously underpopulated… when America is like 300 billion of people , and most likely even more on other continents!

those are the same people who thinks homosexuality is an danger to humanity as a whole because of the procreating bit. they say that humans were all meant to breed, that's the only real reason for humans to exist in their own little world. never mind the fact that lesbians are often known to have some children when they engage into an committed relationship with other women, via artificial insemination. and Gay men often pay for women to become a surrogate mother using their sperm using the same artificial method.

so whenever they realize it or not, some homosexual people are STILL producing children regardless of thier sexual orention…..
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:09AM
mapaghimagsik at 11:03AM, Jan. 5, 2007
(offline)
posts: 711
joined: 9-8-2006
Aren't most of those arguments sugar coating for the whole “The Bible says its bad” argument?

Now just to throw this out for fun, I heard that members of the Taliban in Afghanistan are running around with booklets that basically are a list of do's and don't.

One of the don'ts was: “Don't take a beardless man into battle or into your tent”

or something like that.

But even with really fundamental groups like the Taliban, “teh gay sex” seems to crop up again and again. And the Taliban – fundamentalist islamists probably got that it was bad from the old testament, since strangely enough, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity share the old testament as holy books.

But, my theme today is digression.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
mykill at 12:27PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
Think it through a little more. Yes, homosexuality is not acceptable to many people in the here and now.

The bugaboo here is this - the assumption there could be a ‘cure’ for homosexuality. The fear then is that there would be no homosexuals, because gay isn't good or isn't believed to be good or something.

BUT, if homosexuality can be ‘cured’ genetically it also collapses the ‘moral’ arguments against homosexuality. The ‘cure’ for homosexuality may also ‘cure’ homophobia.

The reality is the the ability to ‘cure’ homosexuality is actually something else: The ability to predetermine sexual orientation.

That leaves us with - why might a parent prefer to have a gay child?

1. Gay children are more likely to support the parents in old age as they are less likely to have additional family to support.

2. Governments that restrict the number of children families can raise, may allow exceptions for gay children who are likely to not promote over population personally.

3. Gay people are often associated with gifts of artistic expression, intelligence and prosperity.

4. Gay couples may provide ideal families for the orphaned.

5. Gay people are less likely to enter relationships for poor reasons like unplanned preganancy, and therefore gay sons and daughters may enjoy better life potential


PS: Islamic homophobia comes from the Koran, the Koranic interpretation of the the story of Sodom leaves no doubt that homosexuality is the sin the city is punished for.

A lot of ideas people have about christianity are actually Islamic and not Christian: Hell as a place with lakes of fire - Koran. Sodom punished for homosexuality - koran, Satan's fall as a function of jealousy over MAN - Koran.

That said, there is room within the Islamic community for tolerance of homosexuality. Islam seems about 100 years behind mainstream Christianity in that regard though. Not the Chriatianity itself is more than a very poor model for tolerance.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
ccs1989 at 1:12PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,656
joined: 1-2-2006
mykill
3. Gay people are often associated with gifts of artistic expression, intelligence and prosperity.

Possibly associated with, but that in itself is a stereotype.

PS: Islamic homophobia comes from the Koran, the Koranic interpretation of the the story of Sodom leaves no doubt that homosexuality is the sin the city is punished for.

A lot of ideas people have about christianity are actually Islamic and not Christian: Hell as a place with lakes of fire - Koran. Sodom punished for homosexuality - koran, Satan's fall as a function of jealousy over MAN - Koran.

That said, there is room within the Islamic community for tolerance of homosexuality. Islam seems about 100 years behind mainstream Christianity in that regard though. Not the Chriatianity itself is more than a very poor model for tolerance.

Between 650 and 1200 CE, Islamic writers actually advised homosexuality because women were so sequestered. Islam has always frowned on homosexuality, but tolerated it during that time. These days…not happening.


http://ccs1989.deviantart.com

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”
-Henry David Thoreau, Walden
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:38AM
mlai at 1:24PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 3,035
joined: 12-28-2006
1. The research is to make unproductive rams more productive. So you can have your goat's milk/cheese, meat, and sweaters. So the farmers/herders can manage their business. We're talking about a 10% loss. So farmers should suffer 10% loss so you can feel good about yourself? Screw ppl and their rights. STFU. This is about economics. I ****ing hate it when ignoramuses touting their oh-so-pressing cultural issues get in the way of science. This is how stem cells got stymied in the US. Fight for social issues elsewhere; leave science alone. I pity those poor scientists getting harassed by blonde tennis players.

2. As for theoretical “cure” for homosexuality… I see nothing wrong with it. Parents have been dictating their children's lives since time immorial. My mother wanted to be a fashion designer, but grandma thought that was a waste of time and burned all of her sketchbooks and designs when she was little. That goes on everywhere, so where are all the laws prohibiting parents from deciding what's good for their kids? Why can't kids eat junk food for dinner? You're altering their preferred physiology by making them eat healthy low-fat food!

I can think of tons of **** parents do to their kids which infringe upon their free will and alter them for life, for better or for worse (I think my mom could've been a great fashion designer). But the gov't doesn't step in and drag the parents away. Because that's what parenting is. Compared to forcing a child into a specific occupation, AFAIC, changing his sexual orientation before he's even aware of sex is PEANUTS. It's as big a deal as circumcision. And if some homosexual-rights person would come up to my dad and tell him he can't infringe on his son's sexual rights, my dad would kill him in 5 seconds. Literally.

FIGHT current chapter: Filling In The Gaps
FIGHT_2 current chapter: Light Years of Gold
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:05PM
ozoneocean at 1:36PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,963
joined: 1-2-2004
There's a lot of nonsense here about genetics… It keeps cropping up over and over. Ho hum. Look, the classical, moronic idea is that either “nature” or “nurture” is responsible for how we turn out. Obviously there is a vastly complex interplay between the properties you are born with, how you are raised, and the society you live in. That's the reality. In the late 19thC “nurture” was all the rage (for humanists): How you were born and who you were born meant nothing! They thought is was all to do with how you were raised. That's what Dickens' was all about, Freud etc.

These days weve swung back to the “nature” idea. That was all the rage in the early 19thC… It fits in well with a class system, you can't change how you're born etc. Extremely moronic, but it seems that most of you believe variations of it even now. Too bad the Nazi party isn't going strong anymore, you'd make ideal candidates. :)

I know, that's not entirely fair, but you have to realise that genetics is only a small part of the equation.

Ewwwwww, please don't go all “CE” all over the place…. That's political correctness at it's weirdest. We all know it's just a replacement for “AD”, I mean, it even uses the exact same time frame… CE is just so sad.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:25PM
Black_Kitty at 2:38PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,480
joined: 1-1-2006
Personally, I think a study on sexual orientation or sexuality in general is pretty worthwhile. Sex and sexuality plays such a big role in society and people's lives, why wouldn't you want to know more about it? The problem is that this one was kind of…well…half-assed. Which isn't that big of a surprise if the original aim was to improve the productivity of herds.

mykill
BUT, if homosexuality can be ‘cured’ genetically it also collapses the ‘moral’ arguments against homosexuality. The ‘cure’ for homosexuality may also ‘cure’ homophobia.

In a way I find this idea kind of interesting. But wouldn't that mean that instead of being irrationally hateful of homosexuals, they would now think of homosexuals as diseased? You don't see a “cure” for heterosexuality. Wouldn't homosexuals then be regarded as damaged people?

You flip the words a bit and I keep picturing it like this: I'm having a pleasant conversation with a man and he asks me “so what are you?”
“Oh I'm Chinese.”
“Oh.” He bites his lip, lays his hand gently on my arm, and tilts his head at just the right angle of sympathy (but not too close lest he might catch it.) “Science has come a long way you know…there's even a patch for it. Two weeks and you'll be cured.”

As a side note…wouldn't this be a hormonal cure?
  
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:24AM
Phantom Penguin at 6:48PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,075
joined: 1-6-2006
ccs1989
mykill
Between 200 and 1200 CE, Islamic writers actually advised homosexuality because women were so sequestered. Islam has always frowned on homosexuality, but tolerated it during that time. These days…not happening.




Happens tons in Iraq. Haha, that brings up some distustingly funny stories. But i will save those for later.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:42PM
ccs1989 at 8:26PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,656
joined: 1-2-2006
ozoneocean
I know, that's not entirely fair, but you have to realise that genetics is only a small part of the equation.

I dunno, I'd say it's an equal part of the equation. Studies on identical twins who grow up in completely different environments have shown that genes do in fact play a big part. Environment might be more important, but not completely.

Ewwwwww, please don't go all “CE” all over the place…. That's political correctness at it's weirdest. We all know it's just a replacement for “AD”, I mean, it even uses the exact same time frame… CE is just so sad.

Guess that's just how I was raised to call it. :P
http://ccs1989.deviantart.com

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”
-Henry David Thoreau, Walden
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:38AM
lothar at 9:10PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,299
joined: 1-3-2006
ccs1989
Between 200 and 1200 CE, Islamic writers actually advised homosexuality because women were so sequestered. Islam has always frowned on homosexuality, but tolerated it during that time. These days…not happening.

Islam wasn't even around in 200 AD
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:45PM
ozoneocean at 9:31PM, Jan. 6, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,963
joined: 1-2-2004
A lot of the studies on twins have been dubious to say the least. Besides, you're talking about an incredibly infinitesimally minute, extremely unrepresentative sample. ;) (identical twins are comparatively quite rare and unlike non twins)

I reiterate that genetics are only ever a part of it. Environment influences how your mind and body develops (the cultural as well as the physical environment). Genetics are just a starting point, and yet we're putting far too much emphasis on it these days. I blame religion: Just as mathematics and the “physical laws of the universe” are the “Language of God” to the religious physicist and mathematician, genetics are “God's Fingerprint” to the religious geneticist or biologist. They're just one of those delightful Deus ex machina for the unsubtle thinkers.

Don't get me wrong, scientists are useful people, I've known many, but not many think much outside their own fields.

CE is silly… What's it for? Going to an atheist or a Buddhist and saying “This event happened then and there on such and such CE.” and they ask what CE is based on, and you have to say, “Uh, it's actually based on the mythological birth date of Christ in the Christian religion. We used to say AD but we thought that CE wouldn't offend you…” Duh! It's not the name that matter's to them: it's the actual time scale itself that's still based on the supposed existence of Chirst! That hasn't changed. A lot of political correctness is actually quite a good and positive thing, but in cases like that it's just so stupidly illogical, it's like a running joke.

But if that's how you were brought up, what can you do? There's no gene for that sort of thing :)
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:25PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved