Would you support a cure for homosexuality and transexualism?
- Thread starter Wraith
- Start date
- Mar 31, 2010
- 7,160
- 125
- 68
- Country
-
- Gender
-
With homosexuality it would be a waste of government money to enforce and pointless since it has no deleterious effects, however given that Gender Identity Disorder does cause a great deal of suffering and our current treatments for it aren't great, I might be able to support a voluntary pre-natal cure. I'm on the fence though since I think it would be a shame if many of the mental variations of the human race were eliminated that way, I myself have Asperger's syndrome and I think it would be a net loss for humanity if the Asperger people were 'cured' out of the population.
You know what, let's toss this discussion in another direction.
Yes i would support it, now before y'all start burning be down, hear me out.
Let's say this is a cure for the person that is a full adult (I know, a bit of a change from the OP, but roll with it)
Why not? It's still his / her choice isn't it?
People always assume that, just because you are gay that those people are happy. Have the guts to stand up for the norm and what not, and all the arguments why gay people who come out for it are usually elevated to a higher position than the rest of us straight peasants. But what if that is not that case? What if, someone is gay and would rather be straight (for the same reason that someone who considered himself straight his whole life believes he is happier off gay)Why shouldn't there be a magical injection for that person?
There was a study i read a long time ago, claiming that being gay was caused by an increase (or decrease, i honestly can't remember) of a certain chemical in the brain. Suppose this is true, that it should be changeable with an injection.
So yes i would support it.
Also, if this injection is given to the baby in the womb, the baby wouldn't know about it. Thus rendering the argument of "well i am gay and i'd be pissed if straightness was forced on me" invalid since the child would not know any better. (although i would not really agree with that, you know, free choice and all.)
Disclaimer: This is by no means trolling / flaming (or baiting there off) OP asked for my opinion and got it.
Yes i would support it, now before y'all start burning be down, hear me out.
Let's say this is a cure for the person that is a full adult (I know, a bit of a change from the OP, but roll with it)
Why not? It's still his / her choice isn't it?
People always assume that, just because you are gay that those people are happy. Have the guts to stand up for the norm and what not, and all the arguments why gay people who come out for it are usually elevated to a higher position than the rest of us straight peasants. But what if that is not that case? What if, someone is gay and would rather be straight (for the same reason that someone who considered himself straight his whole life believes he is happier off gay)Why shouldn't there be a magical injection for that person?
There was a study i read a long time ago, claiming that being gay was caused by an increase (or decrease, i honestly can't remember) of a certain chemical in the brain. Suppose this is true, that it should be changeable with an injection.
So yes i would support it.
Also, if this injection is given to the baby in the womb, the baby wouldn't know about it. Thus rendering the argument of "well i am gay and i'd be pissed if straightness was forced on me" invalid since the child would not know any better. (although i would not really agree with that, you know, free choice and all.)
Disclaimer: This is by no means trolling / flaming (or baiting there off) OP asked for my opinion and got it.
My experience with the LGBT community as a whole is very limited but this reeks of generalization. Gay, transexual, bisexual Etc. people are just as likely to be completely and utterly intolerant, even in matters regarding sexuality something they're supposed to be more open about. Because they are people just like everyone else. But of course the ratio of tolerant to intolerant really wouldn't be much different then any other group.Sleekit said:
To what end are you arguing this point exactly?
There are assholes in every community. But the LGBTQ community doesn't need even more hate thrown its way. I have recieved far more hate from people outside the community than within the community (Until I got so good at being closeted that the hate stopped.) so...Sleekit said:
Sorry, Do you have a point here? Or are you just generalising from a few assholes to an entire community? Yes, I have met some Feminists that I never want to speak to again for their treatment of MTF Trans or FTM Trans (One is coopting, the other is betraying), met some gay guys that have been... less than welcoming towards a bloke that is interested in a romantic relationship first and foremost for whom the idea of fucking a stranger, of any gender, is just not on. The head of the LGBTQ campaigns on campus is against freedom of speech, due to being a fucking idiot.
Does that make me intolerant? No. The majority of the movement? No. Most feminists? No. Is the LGBTQ community a community? Depending on the area, most fucking certainly. Sure, it has its issues. Every group has its issues.
Hell, get a group of Communists into the pub. Within an hour there will be 4 factions and 5 alliances.
On that note, speaking as a smoker here, I have seen more self-righteous smokers going on about their right to smoke than ex smokers or anti smokers and, from talking to my many vegan friends (None of which have ever lectured me about eating bacon.) they get more shit from meat eaters than they deal out to others.
How is your strawman doing bro?
The most intolerant people I have ever met were white supremacists, racists, Muslim extremists, homophobes and Tories. I am jealous if the most intolerant people you have ever met were in the LGBTQ community.
It means you have lived a charmed life.
Definitely not support it, ones sexuality defines who who they are. And no sexual orientation is above another.
You've probably seen the debates over whether homosexuality is a choice. While I won't indulge in that particular argument, the reason people who argue against homosexuality make that claim is because A) By their reasoning all the gay people could choose to be straight and be more like them and B) it's less discriminatory if you're mistreating a group who made the decision to be a part of a group then someone who had no choice. The difference between mocking someone because they're black vs someone because they're a vegetarian.Longstreet said:
By introducing a vaccine it most definitely is a choice now. While I am supportive of choice, and would happily allow people to choose their own sexuality, people would use it as a justification to mistreat those who simply chose to remain the way they are. It's a big can of worms in my eyes that doesn't have any right answers. I'd much rather we try to make homophobia a non-issue rather then go to such desperate measures. Most problems caused by homosexual relations aren't caused by homosexuality, but rather by other people's attitude towards it.
I'm going to quote myself in response to the injection before birth scenario since I covered it before. I really don't have anything to add (not that my opinion is the end all be all, mind you.)
I don't have any hard feelings or anything towards you, I just think that there are some problems with the sentiment.GeneralFungi said:
Yeah, I'd support it. But not if it were somehow mandatory.
Some people don't like the fact that they're gay or transsexual. I'm 100% positive that if a 'cure' existed, some people would take it. And for those people, I would support the development of a cure.
I think we can all agree the gay and/or transsexual life isn't the easiest. Some of them might want an out; why not give them one?
Though now that I think about it, kinda feels reminiscent of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind... just erasing a part of yourself. But, y'know... it's their choice.
One's sexuality is a detail, not the big picture.
Some people don't like the fact that they're gay or transsexual. I'm 100% positive that if a 'cure' existed, some people would take it. And for those people, I would support the development of a cure.
I think we can all agree the gay and/or transsexual life isn't the easiest. Some of them might want an out; why not give them one?
Though now that I think about it, kinda feels reminiscent of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind... just erasing a part of yourself. But, y'know... it's their choice.
That's not even remotely true.AVATAR_RAGE said:
One's sexuality is a detail, not the big picture.
If you could alter someone's sexuality through some form of neurological intervention, then that would have interesting social and ethical consequences.
If such a medical intervention existed, I would not ban it. If someone wants to alter their sexuality or orientation, and the technology to really do it exists, then they should be allowed to, if that is what they want. Of course, you could say that it would be better for them to accept themselves for who they are - but if they want to take the treatment, what arey you going to do? Tackle them to the ground and scream "NO! YOU'VE GOT TO ACCEPT YOU WHO ARE! ACCEPT IT! ACCEEEEPPTTT IIIITTT!"?
If such a medical intervention existed, then no one should be forced from taking it. No one should be prevented either. The treatment should not be given to children - when they become adults then they can decide if they want their sexuality altered.
It's a very hypothetical scenario. We have nothing that comes close to altering human sexuality. We barely understand the neurological components that underlie sexual orientation or gender identity. Until we do, no such intervention will exist.
If such a medical intervention existed, I would not ban it. If someone wants to alter their sexuality or orientation, and the technology to really do it exists, then they should be allowed to, if that is what they want. Of course, you could say that it would be better for them to accept themselves for who they are - but if they want to take the treatment, what arey you going to do? Tackle them to the ground and scream "NO! YOU'VE GOT TO ACCEPT YOU WHO ARE! ACCEPT IT! ACCEEEEPPTTT IIIITTT!"?
If such a medical intervention existed, then no one should be forced from taking it. No one should be prevented either. The treatment should not be given to children - when they become adults then they can decide if they want their sexuality altered.
It's a very hypothetical scenario. We have nothing that comes close to altering human sexuality. We barely understand the neurological components that underlie sexual orientation or gender identity. Until we do, no such intervention will exist.
"Cure"? That's rewiring a person's brain so they lose something that has informed every part of their life until that point. "Cure" in this case refers to the procedure of quite literally brainwashing people to conform to the norms of current society, even though such people are not actually doing anything wrong, in the criminal sense. What you're suggesting is to take innocent people and rewire their neurological map so that they are "normal", in your eyes. Is that not like rewriting a darker race's genetic code so that their skin doesn't produce as much melanin, or rewriting every male's genes to have a second X chromosome instead of a Y chromosome?
I don't know about anyone else here, but I think that's fucked up. That's not a cure, that's a permutation of what some would call ethnic cleansing. And I'm not alright with that. The better, simpler solution is to realize that different types of people exist, and to accept it and move along. This "cure" is an antithesis of that.
To clarify, if you want to change that by your own will, go ahead. But don't ever shove this upon others.
I don't know about anyone else here, but I think that's fucked up. That's not a cure, that's a permutation of what some would call ethnic cleansing. And I'm not alright with that. The better, simpler solution is to realize that different types of people exist, and to accept it and move along. This "cure" is an antithesis of that.
To clarify, if you want to change that by your own will, go ahead. But don't ever shove this upon others.
I would support it for the individual, not for the parent. If you want to be straight then you want to be straight, if you want to be gay then you can be gay. Of course peer pressure is always a factor but that's present in everyday life. Smokers get peer pressure about smoking (yes I know it's bad for you but it's still a choice), as do overweight people about losing weight.
I don't think those who want it should be denied anymore than those who didn't want it can say no.
I don't think those who want it should be denied anymore than those who didn't want it can say no.
I am just questioning the point of your post, it seemed designed to declare that the entire LGBTQ community was:Sleekit said:
- Not a community
- Full of assholes
You have to pay attention to how you use language. That is what was indicated. That is what you were trying to indicate. If it was not what you were trying to indicate you need to start writing with more clarity.
What, exactly, was your point?
Hey, as long as some bloke or she-male isn't trying to fuck me i could care less that they exist...i'd much rather cure the disease of liking pop music so i don't have to listen to shit music on the radio stations at work 
This whole topic is completely crazy. For me to have a valid opinion i would have to be in the group of people who would be affected by the change and then my answer would more than likely be fixed by my sexual identity (whatever that means). Human stupidity is the problem (on both sides) and i don't think that can be fixed in the womb.
This whole topic is completely crazy. For me to have a valid opinion i would have to be in the group of people who would be affected by the change and then my answer would more than likely be fixed by my sexual identity (whatever that means). Human stupidity is the problem (on both sides) and i don't think that can be fixed in the womb.