Would you support a cure for homosexuality and transexualism?

[RedDeadFred]

But do we support abortion just because it's not a boy or whatever? We support abortion when it's needed, right?

Do we prevent people from terminating a pregnancy based on sex?

In some parts of the world, it's punishable by death so yes, I would support a cure. I'm not saying that everyone who is homosexual should take it, I'm saying that in some countries, it might be the best option. At least it's another option. They can choose between: staying and suppressing who they are, staying and not suppressing who they are but then most likely dying, leaving for a more enlightened country and having to say goodbye to all of their friends and family, or taking a cure that will allow them to stay and live a normal life. It's a shitty situation but I would probably take the last option if I was in it.

So would you also support a "cure" for blackness? There are parts of the world where that can border on a death sentence. Hell, any race can be a death sentence in some part of the world.

Yes, I wouldn't advocate using it unless the person absolutely wanted it. If it's going to make them happier and they think they'll have a better life, then yes, I will 100% support it. If someone has no control over the misery in their lives, I think they should be given a way out.

 

[Call me Baz]

I don't like how this question is worded. I think having a method to "cure" any problem would likely be more helpful to have than not, and I would support it being developed. The part of the question is dislike is how it's phrased at the end. I would never want anything like this to be mandatory, and would never support governments attempting to make it this way.

For something like a couple being told they will never have a baby, then managing to have one, I can see why the parents may want their son to grow up heterosexual, in order to continue the family name, especially in a "only son of an only son" scenario. (Remember, if you have no children, you break a previously unbroken line of descent from the very first human coupling)

As for people complaining about how it's not a free choice, I don't know about that - if I offered you the chance for an eternity of bliss after death in exchange for you being a slave for 10 years with no memory of anything before your slavery term started and you agreed to it, do you think the slave you would feel like you had had a choice? Obviously not, why would someone become a slave willingly? If you don't know there was a choice made beforehand, you don't know it was your choice. [THIS LAST PART IS ONLY IF THE "CURE" WORKS BEFORE BIRTH]

If it's made available and works at any stage of life hell why not, then we could put an end to all this "if you saw life through my eyes" stuff between homophobes and homophobe-a-phobes(this isn't really a word, but you all know what I mean) being able to swap sexuality

 

[Rosiv]

I dont know, i mean cure is a misnomer maybe for homosexuality, but for transsexualism, im not sure. It does cause people alot of strife, although i wonder if that strife could be reduced to something completely negligible with a completely socially accepting environment for them to transition in. For usually whenever i hear of trans peoples internal struggles, they come hand in hand with bigotry and cruelty from others.

I mean, i wish we could live in a world where if someone truly wanted to change themselves for whatever reasons, they could without being seen as a freak, but also for that person to maybe to feel forcibly compelled to change, by their internal feelings.

Its confounding really, for medical science could reach this point one day.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Why would you compare homosexuality to paedophilia? I await your response.

Because they're both sexual preferences that cannot be chosen. Your move.

But homosexuality isn't a bad thing?

 

[ellieallegro]

But... but their is a cure for homosexuality et al. It's called stop being a bigoted ass because the world has bigger problems than what hole they want to have or where they want to stick it.

 

[oZode]

No, Gender Identity Disorder doesn't impair one's ability to function in society enough to look for a cure for. As a personality disorder it's not that big of a deal, it's like trying to make a cure of narcissism.

I'd rather my tax dollars be spent on something important for once instead.

Mind that I disagree with the idea of "boycotting Russian Olympics" over the gay laws, so it's not like i'm someone who supports LGBT's plight beyond gay marriage since we need more orphans adopted. It's that I see no reason for a cure since for a disorder that does not impair one's ability to contribute to society.

 

[FancyNick]

No. It's not natural to "adjust" a child's development as the parent's sees fit in that regard. Then again, the same argument can be made for actual developmental and genetic problems such as mental retardation or Alzheimer's. It's kind of a blurry line between what some people see as an actual genetic defect and what isn't.

All for curing actual genetic and developmental diseases and disorders. Not a fan of adjusting the child's sexual preferences, changing the child's appearance, or changing the child's behavior

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Can we not just cure homophobia instead? I think that would solve a lot more problems.

Prejudice in general is a larger issue that would probably be much harder to actually do.

Oddly enough, prejudiced people respond really well to cognitive and cognitive-behavioural therapy for overcoming their prejudices. It's a bit time consuming but the real problem is the people have to be willing to undertake the therapy.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

I'd support it about as much as I'd support a cure for blonde hair and blue eyes.

That is... not really at all. Better to develop and improve on treatments that people can choose for themselves. Like sex reassignment surgery. And of course we could try to eliminate bigotry through education.

So you will needlessly tear out all of the electrical wiring in your home instead of installing a light switch, and you will do this on the principle of the matter? I know I wouldn't want my tax dollars going towards a comparatively Rube Goldberg style medical practice like sex reassignment surgery, if there was a relatively inexpensive solution available in the form of a 'miracle' pill. Healthcare is not a limitless resource. The medical resources that would be saved on opting to take a pill versus undertaking surgery could always be utilised elsewhere in our hopelessly overburdened healthcare system.

 

[oZode]

Actually I gots a better idea.

Along with curing the gay let's cure most forms of personality, so much deviance it is unacceptable. We need to make everything think the same by curing all the deviances of the human mind so everything thinks like a drone and only let a couple people we assume to know better than us do all the thinking for a stable, centralized world instead.

 

[littlealicewhite]

A cure for already existing homosexuals and transsexuals? No. A pre-natal treatment to prevent homosexuality or transsexualism? Maybe. I'd be more inclined to say yes for the transsexualism than for the homosexuality, as in a more accepting society homosexuals would have little to no ill effect for being homosexual. Transsexuals suffer from mental and emotional turmoil not caused only by society's reaction but their own internal confusion as well.

 

[JediMB]

I'd support it about as much as I'd support a cure for blonde hair and blue eyes.

That is... not really at all. Better to develop and improve on treatments that people can choose for themselves. Like sex reassignment surgery. And of course we could try to eliminate bigotry through education.

So you will needlessly tear out all of the electrical wiring in your home instead of installing a light switch, and you will do this on the principle of the matter? I know I wouldn't want my tax dollars going towards a comparatively Rube Goldberg style medical practice like sex reassignment surgery, if there was a relatively inexpensive solution available in the form of a 'miracle' pill. Healthcare is not a limitless resource. The medical resources that would be saved on opting to take a pill versus undertaking surgery could always be utilised elsewhere in our hopelessly overburdened healthcare system.

Your analogy fails. You seem to be looking at transsexuality as something clear-cut, and the humans involved as something less than individuals.

Let's say that you are to "cure" a fetus of its transsexuality. Do you make its body develop to fit its brain, or its brain to fit its body? And what about gender-queer people who wouldn't necessarily desire to change from how they were (supposed to be) born? And should we use the same treatment for any other individual features that the person-to-be might conceivable be unhappy with?

 

[Paradoxrifts]

Let's say that you are to "cure" a fetus of its transsexuality. Do you make its body develop to fit its brain, or its brain to fit its body?

Whichever choice would provide the best results for the patient, of course.

I think that the wider LGBT community should have about as much say in decisions such as this one as the members of the christian church would conceivably have.

This is to say absolutely no say in the matter at all, unless it is their child. I would hope that absolutely nobody should be making such decisions without having the patient's best interests in mind.

And what about gender-queer people who wouldn't necessarily desire to change from how they were (supposed to be) born? And should we use the same treatment for any other individual features that the person-to-be might conceivable be unhappy with?

If pill does it's job that will never ever happen, but if it does happen then it is a faulty 'miracle pill'. It no longer does what the original poster described.

 

[Something Amyss]

Oddly enough, prejudiced people respond really well to cognitive and cognitive-behavioural therapy for overcoming their prejudices. It's a bit time consuming but the real problem is the people have to be willing to undertake the therapy.

Well, I was talking along the lines of the same sort of thing we're talking for homosexuals and transsexuals, which would ostensibly involve vaccination rather than therapy.

It's good to know, however.

 

[Jadak]

But do we support abortion just because it's not a boy or whatever? We support abortion when it's needed, right?

Do we prevent people from terminating a pregnancy based on sex?

Kind of a moot point to prevent that regardless. You can't allow abortion in general (ie: don't want a kid) and deny it over certain reasons, as all you accomplish is to force people into lying about those reasons.

 

[Eggsnham]

Sure. Of course, it would have to be a situation where the person makes the decision for him/herself when they're legally old enough; but otherwise, I see no reason why such a thing shouldn't be supported.

Also, on a side note, being gay or transsexual is a disorder. It's not a bad thing, and it's not something that can be helped, but denying that it's something that occurs when something goes wrong in the body isn't going to help anybody. It's like saying that any given Depressive Disorder or any given disorder on the Autistic spectrum aren't medical issues.

 

[Bakuryukun]

Cure? Cure implies that there is something wrong with them. I don't think that'd be the right word for what you're asking about.

 

[Bakuryukun]

Sure. Of course, it would have to be a situation where the person makes the decision for him/herself when they're legally old enough; but otherwise, I see no reason why such a thing shouldn't be supported.

Also, on a side note, being gay or transsexual is a disorder. It's not a bad thing, and it's not something that can be helped, but denying that it's something that occurs when something goes wrong in the body isn't going to help anybody. It's like saying that any given Depressive Disorder or any given disorder on the Autistic spectrum aren't medical issues.

You know that having blue eyes is a mutation? Does this mean that everyone with blue eyes has a disorder? In order to be a disorder it has to have some tangible detriment to the people who have it, other than being scrutinized by society at large for no real reason, that isn't the case with homosexuality.

 

[Caiphus]

Hehe, alright. Yeah, you're right. I'm sure pharmaceutical companies are all over that one already though.

They probably are. In any case, nobody ever got ostracised from their family for liking pancakes.

So my super serious answer:

Although I sympathise with the OP in that there aren't many words one can use other than 'cure' to describe a drug that stops something from happening, it does have some unfortunate implications. Which is what you were trying to bring up with your pancakes example. Being gay should be thought of as something so normal that it would be absurd to cure it. Like eating pancakes.

Anyway, like people have brought up, the only real detriment to being gay or transexual is that people are going to give you shit for it, the amount of shit depending on where you grow up. If you're in a western country, you may be relatively fine, a bit awkward telling your parents, but whatever. If you're in the middle east, you might need to hide that shit for the rest of your life or die. In that circumstance, I'm sure a gay person really would appreciate a 'cure', because being gay might be fatal.
Other than that, gay people don't contribute to the population issue, so why would we get rid of them? And they don't hurt anybody. As many gay people have pointed out, the only problem with being gay is that non-gays give you a hard time.

So with that in mind, the best cure for gay people isn't to stop them being gay. It's to stop people from being bigoted.

So yeah.