Poll: If you could know your baby's sexual orientation...

[Goenitz]

One reason, I want my DNA to live on. Having children is the only real way to live forever.

 

[JDviewer]

When I first saw the OP my first thought was about that scene from Scrubs.

 

[joshthor]

In the future, if you were having a baby & doctors told you he/she would be gay/straight; but they had the ability to switch genes so he/she would be straight/gay. Would you do it, or would you leave your baby the way the genes naturally occurred?

*note: I am NOT equating homosexuality to a disease that needs to be cured. NOR am i implying any discrimination towards homosexuals. This is a hypothetical.

i dont believe being gay or straight is a matter of genetics, its a choice based on living conditions as far as i am concerned (if it was genetic how can it really get passed on? gay people cant really have biological children). im not anti-gay or anything. i just dont think its a genetic condition.

 

[joshthor]

Sexuality is a choice?
Fiddling around with your offsprings hardwiring for the sake of "having things in common"?
The ignorance and intolerance showcased in this topic sickens me.

there is no proof that sexuality is not a choice.

 

[IankBailey]

With that logic being hetero is a choice as well.

 

[Nemu]

Lesbian.
If, by some horrific, inconceivable incident, I were to become pregnant, I'd not change the genes.


Seriously, I'm surprised this thread has gone on for as long as it has.

//edit:

there is no proof that sexuality is not a choice.

Do you honestly think I CHOSE to be hated by members of my own family, to say nothing of complete strangers?
Really? *rolls eyes*
There's nothing like overhearing "I won't let you go near [my name] because I don't want her to turn you". Especially in the hospital, visiting my father, who was on his deathbed.

True story. -___-

 

[Laddan]

I don´t care if my child becomes gay or straight, it´s his/her matter of choice, not mine.

And I woulnd´t love them less or get ashamed of them either, I would rather think it would be better if he/she would be open about their sexual orientation instead of keeping it as a secret.

 

[Fraught]

While I don't have anything against gays, I would. Reasons include bullying, and like someone else said, he'd have more things in common with me.

 

[Woodsey]

Lesbian; wouldn't change the orientation. If I learned my parents tweeked MY genes to suit some kind of cultural or religious need to be "normal," I'd go out of my mind with anger. It would be a violation of MY ethics, years after the fact!

Straight, gay, leave those kids alone.

Where is the option for the fact Homosexuality is a choice, not a matter genes.

Well I'm guessing that option isn't there because it's complete bollocks.

Ninja'd. But that's ok. I'm rather happy I wasn't the first person to call it out.

Lovin' how he declares it a fact as well

 

[Ryuk2]

Change genes or abortion. I like to keep away from gays, not because i would be interested in they sex life, no no, I don't like how they talk, how they act and what they are talking about. Homosexuality is not something to be proud about (or ashamed), it's a defect. It happens, but if we can make it not happen, why wouldn't we?

 

[cathou]

Lesbian.
If, by some horrific, inconceivable incident, I were to become pregnant, I'd not change the genes.


Seriously, I'm surprised this thread has gone on for as long as it has.

//edit:

there is no proof that sexuality is not a choice.

Do you honestly think I CHOSE to be hated by members of my own family, to say nothing of complete strangers?
Really? *rolls eyes*
There's nothing like overhearing "I won't let you go near [my name] because I don't want her to turn you". Especially in the hospital, visiting my father, who was on his deathbed.

True story. -___-

same situation, same answer, i wouldnt touch it. if it's happen, it,s happen. i wouldnt not encourage it nor desaprouve it

 

[la-le-lu-li-lo]

Best argument ever, who cares whether it is a choice or not, shouldn't we all wish for the happiness of one another? Shouldn't we be able to be happy in both the romantic and sexual sense of a relationship? Thus, we don't even need to question whether it is a choice or not, but rather we can learn to love one another enough to wish happiness on all people no matter how they gain that (within the sense of reason, but I shouldn't even have to say that).

Exactly.

For example, I'm attracted to guys who are kind of assholes. Is that good or even "healthy"? No, but it makes me happy. I find it charming! [As long as they're not mean to me...]

Could I choose not to date assholes? Yes. Does that magically change what I'm attracted to? No.

 

[la-le-lu-li-lo]

With that logic being hetero is a choice as well.

A-FUCKING-MEN.

Thank goodness someone else realizes this double-standard bullshit. Ughhhh.

 

[BaldursBananaSoap]

Sexuality is a choice?
Fiddling around with your offsprings hardwiring for the sake of "having things in common"?
The ignorance and intolerance showcased in this topic sickens me.

It's kinda ironic how many people throw around the word intolerant while being extremely intolerant to other peoples views when none of them are even slightly offensive.

 

[paragon1]

Ohh, I wouldn't want to know really. I'd be more concerned with fixing something really harmful, like downs syndrome or something.

 

[Novandor]

I'm gay, myself. If my child were gay, I'd keep him that way; if he were straight, I'd keep him that way as well. I have no place meddling in WHO my child is, just in teaching him right and wrong.

Homosexuality is not a choice. Rationalize it: who in their right mind would wake up one morning and say, "Hey, I want to be gay! I'm going to risk my life, I'm going to risk getting insulted and ostracized!". I know I never woke up one morning and decided to be gay; my only choice in this was acknowledging it, and I'm fairly sure that denying who you are is mentally unhealthy.

Also... for the Bible stuff, the Bible is up to interpretation; it's been translated many times, and still can be interpreted differently. I've heard that some of the lines (specifically the ones about "a man should not lay with another man") were added after its initial writing, and it was not written directly by God but by men interpreting his word. Not everyone believes in the Bible, anyway... and besides, doesn't it say not to judge others, that they'll be judged when they die?
Also, homosexual activity occurs sometimes in nature, in animals. (And please don't pull out the "BUT WE'RE NOT ANIMALS" card, anyone; we do the same stuff as animals, and stuff that animals don't do. But the "natural" argument? Well, if it occurs in nature, it MUST be natural, right?)

Also, I don't exactly dislike the flamboyant gays... I'm a little on the obvious side, myself. I can be friends with flamboyant gay guys, but they can get a little grating on the nerves (depending on how bitchy they are. I've encountered really bitchy flamers, and really sweet ones as well). I could never date a flamer, though... only friends.

You may not choose your genetic predisposition to be gay, but you still choose to act upon it.

The bible has been translated many times. But it was translated by scholars who have devoted their lives in the study of the original language. I am currently learning greek myself. There are numerous passages that claim homosexuality as sin. There are also numerous biblical scholars who say it was in the earliest manuscripts. And while you may not believe the bible, I do.

I am not judging you, I am merely stating that the moral law that I subscribe to says homosexuality is sin. This does not in anyway mean that you are worth less than I, or worse than I am on some kind of sin scale. All have fallen short of the glory of God. There are none righteous, not not one.

Nature is not a valid point of reference for morality. I have seen a mouse give birth to a litter of mice, and then eat them. Nature is pretty messed up. I am also not arguing against nature, because I claim our nature is corrupt. It is natural to hate those you don't like, does that make it moral?

Is it natural to be self sacrificing? Is it natural to lay down your life for someone else? Is it natural to place others before yourself? These go against our nature, does that make in immoral?

When someone says that they shouldn't act on feeling towards someone of the same sex because it's a sin, in a way, that's demoralizing them because they simply care about someone. Straight people don't know what it's like to be gay.

There are young teens that go through the stage of realizing that they are gay/lesbian/bisexual and try to change that because they do not want to be hurt, physically or mentally, by friends or family or even complete strangers. Yes they can choose to not act on those feelings. But that's rejecting them for the chance to love.

There are so many things in the bible that says that are sins. Yet what I don't understand why most people tend to stay focused on homosexuality. I've seen religious people treat homosexuality as something that is worse of a sin, then of someone that commits murder.

Now, I don't believe in the bible. It was written by man, and because of being treated like less of a human being for being gay, I gave up on my religion because I choose not to be part of a something that treats people like they are a disease. I don't have to have a religion to believe in god. I believe in god, but I like to believe that he loves everyone. How could he dislike someone that loves another person. Regardless if it's a person of the same sex, or opposite sex. Saying god loves people that are gay, but doesn't like homosexuality, is basicly splitting hairs. They are both part of the same thing. Saying that god doesn't like homosexuality is pretty much saying that he doesn't like gay people, but just using different words.

If anyone believes in the bible, that's fine. Nothing wrong with that. If the bible says that being gay is a sin, no one should say that just because someone is gay, they will automaticly go to hell and so they should repent. That's forcing religion onto someone. Speaking opinion is entirely different. One can speaking their opinion, but say it in the way that doesn't seem like it's almost as if someone is tring to force something upon someone else. But I just wish that everyone could treat every person like a human being. Just because someone is gay, doesn't make them a bad person. Anyone could meet someone that is gay, realize that they are not like the stereotypes that a lot of people tend to picture them as and see that they are like everyone else. We are all part of humanity. But why can't we just be human towards each other?

 

[Ezekel]

You may not choose your genetic predisposition to be gay, but you still choose to act upon it.

Exactly. And there's nothing wrong with it.

Nature is not a valid point of reference for morality. I have seen a mouse give birth to a litter of mice, and then eat them. Nature is pretty messed up. I am also not arguing against nature, because I claim our nature is corrupt. It is natural to hate those you don't like, does that make it moral?

Is it natural to be self sacrificing? Is it natural to lay down your life for someone else? Is it natural to place others before yourself? These go against our nature, does that make in immoral?

How do you define what is natural and what is not? And I agree that is not a good way to define what is moral and what is not, but I'm also confused as to why you would think altruism "goes against our nature". After all, we can see it in kids and other social animals.

Well for the first, that is a matter of your opinion, just as it is in my opinion wrong.

As for the second, while there may be some examples of altruism in nature, it is not the norm. Survival instincts tell you to not put yourself in danger. And while yes kids can share and be self sacrificing, I can show you a dozen kids that will scream "MINE" over something that they don't even really want. We teach children to share.

You agree with me on nature not being a good reference point for morality, so I don't really see what the problem is. We could argue over what is and isn't natural but we both agree that the definition is not important for the basis of morality.

 

[LiquidGrape]

It's kinda ironic how many people throw around the word intolerant while being extremely intolerant to other peoples views when none of them are even slightly offensive.

Oh, I'd say that the notion of sexuality being a conscious decision is rather offensive.
It practically renders the entire struggle for sexual equality meaningless since "those homos just kept on in spite and could've straightened up at any time."
That is the kind of argument that would be valid if aforementioned idea was taken as hard fact.

 

[Lieju]

Is it natural to be self sacrificing? Is it natural to lay down your life for someone else? Is it natural to place others before yourself? These go against our nature, does that make in immoral?

I would kinda disagree that altruism goes against our nature (Allthough the whole consept of nature would need to be determined first, so it's not that important)

However, altruism and helping others of your species can be a part of the survival strategy of the species. It can be observed in social animals, and it's studied in evolutionary psychology. In any case, when it comes to determining what is moral and what is not, one thing I examine is does it hurt someone? Homosexuality doesn't cause any harm to anyone, so I think it's ok. You might not think it is acceptable behavior, and while I don't agree, I respect your right to have that belief and even act on it within certain limits.

 

[happysock]

I don't have a problem with gays and i'm a heterosexual, as long as they aren't in your face about it

No, that means you do have a problem with it. 'As long as' is equivalent to the word 'but'. It's okay to be gay means as fucking 'gay' as someone wants. These phrases are not innocent and should not be displayed as such.

Anyways, I'm gay, and I wouldn't change the genes mostly cause I don't give a shit who my children will wanna bang.

Sorry that's phrased a bit poor I'm ok with gay people that don't feel the need to sit next to you at the bus stop and get with each other. But yeah I realised that after I posted it and just couldn't be bothered to change it at the time.