Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Would you replace a homosexual gene in your child if given the choice? Watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Would you replace a homosexual gene in your child if given the choice?
    Yes
    165
    49.11%
    No
    171
    50.89%

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    You can't seem to get it in your head that you have demonstrated no logical argument as to what makes the two so different.
    You really are having trouble reading.
    There is more than one type of Christian.
    There are other religions aside from Christianity.
    Religion is not the only reason why someone would prefer a heterosexual over a homosexual. Their reasons are no different to why you would rather not have a disabled child, so please stop with bashing religion. Nobody is telling you to be religious, but it gives you no right to talk badly about it just because the views of religion are different to yours.
    This only offends you because you are homosexual. You are not disabled which is why you have no problem altering a disabled child.

    I'm fully aware that racism is still prevalent. I'm black and no I wouldn't choose for my child to be white. I clearly have first hand experience of being an ethnic minority so I know how to handle myself living in a predominantly white society.
    Who said anything about raising a child to believe that differences is wrong?

    My main point here is that your initial comment was contradictory considering you said you wouldn't change a homosexual child but you would change a disabled child.

    Do you support incest?
    I'm going to say this one more time so listen up: disabilities cause problems for people OUTSIDE of prejudice, surely you can't believe that the only thing that would bother a disabled person is not being accepted by others? Constantly having to take medication, pain, inability to learn none of which seem to have anything to do with bigotry. Homosexuality however, is only seen as something bad because of ignorance and prejudice-literally the only reason! So if you quote me again saying that they are the same I'll just assume you haven't read my post and are just continuously copying the same 'argument' you have made previously, I am not repeating myself again. Also, you seemed to have missed the point when I mentioned the bible (as an example), as I said, you are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you want but if you start a debate with me surrounding an issue that often brings up religion, I am going to challenge it! And there is plenty to challenge when it comes to EVERY religion. You have completely contradicted yourself when saying you wouldn't want to raise your child to believe that differences are wrong, that's exactly what you would be doing if you changed their genetics to make you happy. No, don't support incest (unlike certain religious texts) because of the obvious defects of lack of diversity in the gene pool, I'm bored of this argument now, I've made my points and you've ignored them, good day!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Hmmmmmm~

    I said No.. because I'm guessing it would mean that the 'being an idiot' virus from which would be suffering from, would have to be inoculated first
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Of course I would, what kind of a question is that? :eek:

    The poll shows just how brainwashed half of these students are – I guess they would also keep their future children blind or autistic on the basis of nearsighted ‘support in any circumstances’. What about all the hardship that comes with homosexuality regardless of how the rest of the society perceive it? You don't deserve to have children and I hope you'll grow out of this insanity before you procreate!
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    That's okay, you don't have to think the same for disabilities, but other people do.
    I wasn't referring to any disabilities in particular, but it's only really severe disabilities that would make this comparison so different and especially with the ability to manage most disabilities, one can enjoy a moderately happy life.
    In terms of disfigurement, anyone can still do the things you've stated.
    Like you said, with the support of friends and family, that invidiual could be happy.

    You are referring to the most extreme disabilities. Most disabilities are not as extreme as you are describing. In addition, one would also have to accept that they may face certain challenges that would need to be overcome, particularly in the workforce and the outside world.This can also be said for homosexuality and other members of the LGBT community.

    Like I said, it's only when you are discussing extreme life limiting disabilities that this becomes an issue. Most disabilities are not as debilitating as your example.
    I'm not saying they're identical but they are similar.

    Its not so much about altering the skin of an existing child, because In most cases, you are choosing the skin colour of your baby purely by who you choose to have a child with.
    I'm referring to people who purposely have a child with someone to avoid their child having a particular skin colour. They're within their right to do that & may feel that they don't want their kid to grow up and be discriminated against. I can understand that.
    It's not really the most severe, disabilities by definition lead to some obvious loss of mental or physical capacity. This is not comparable with homosexuality - the person is not suffering loss of mental or physical capacity. Acceptance in one case is vastly different to acceptance in the other. In the latter, it's based purely on personal beliefs and nothing more or less. In the former case, however, you have to accept that in some way your communication with the other person will be impaired, and many people find this too much of a hassle. I have volunteered for people with a range of conditions and let me tell you it took a lot of patience and good will to maintain a conversation. Regardless of the degree, the vast majority of conditions recognised as disabilities are debilitating. As before, this may applicable to every case of disability, but I would argue that it is in the majority of cases.

    Well, I will drop the second argument because that is more so an opinion rather than a factual difference. I do disagree nonetheless!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Of course I would, what kind of a question is that? :eek:

    The poll shows just how brainwashed half of these students are – I guess they would also keep their future children blind or autistic on the basis of nearsighted ‘support in any circumstances’. What about all the hardship that comes with homosexuality regardless of how the rest of the society perceive it? You don't deserve to have children and I hope you'll grow out of this insanity before you procreate!
    What's the hardship other than society's perception then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    What's the hardship other than society's perception then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    More prone to various mental disorders, much more difficult to find a partner and lower probability of having a successful long-term relationship, no kids (at least not their own) and all the evolutionary consequences, ultimately resulting in the fact that the condition isn't normal.

    Let's say an embryo would develop with six fingers on one of the hands – no disadvantages, not even the ones resulting from homosexuality, but we'd still prevent it. Why? Because that's not how humans are supposed to look like. Other decent analogies include the nictitating membrane or slight mental retardation like IQ 90 – of course one would choose to upgrade to at least 100!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    People are so ignorant about homosexuality. Most of this ignorance is due to the portrayal of homosexuality in the media.

    Facts:

    According to the American Psychological Association:

    "There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles..."

    A 2002 survey in the United States by the National Center for Health Statistics found that 1.8 percent of men ages 18–44 considered themselves bisexual, 2.3 percent homosexual, and 3.9 percent as "something else". The same study found that 2.8 percent of women ages 18–44 considered themselves bisexual, 1.3 percent homosexual, and 3.8 percent as "something else".

    About half of homosexuals have been heterosexual and half have changed from homosexual to heterosexual, suggesting a high turnover of sexual preference (Bell, Weinberg and Hammersmith (1981), Rosario et al. (1996), Laumann et al. (1994), Cameron et al (1985)).

    Most homosexuals choose to be gay because it suits their combined genetic, physiological and social being. Being Gay is the extreme end of a normal spectrum of human sexual behaviour. No, I wouldn't delete any gene that made it slightly more likely.
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    More prone to various mental disorders, much more difficult to find a partner and lower probability of having a successful long-term relationship, no kids (at least not their own) and all the evolutionary consequences, ultimately resulting in the fact that the condition isn't normal.

    Let's say an embryo would develop with six fingers on one of the hands – no disadvantages, not even the ones resulting from homosexuality, but we'd still prevent it. Why? Because that's not how humans are supposed to look like. Other decent analogies include the nictitating membrane or slight mental retardation like IQ 90 – of course one would choose to upgrade to at least 100!
    More prone to various mental disorders? What??
    It's not more difficult to find a partner, in fact. Statistically the chances are lower, yes, but that's it.
    About kids, why not adopt instead of overpopulating this poor world? And even so, you assume that all heteros will reproduce which is obscene.

    "Normal" with regards to what? Is this about religious beliefs or so?

    Such ignorance in the second paragraph. In what way would you compare having a sixth finger to being homosexual? That is by far the silliest comparison I've seen. Physically, humans have a set appearance, to out it plainly. Of course a sixth finger would not be normal because it would lead to debilitation. With homosexuality, no debilitation occurs. And even so, by using this idiotic analogy you presume that everyone in this world has the exact same preferences. Well, not at all.

    The second analogy is equally flawed. I don't get how your sexual preference is comparable to IQ measurements.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    More prone to various mental disorders? What??
    It's not more difficult to find a partner, in fact. Statistically the chances are lower, yes, but that's it.
    About kids, why not adopt instead of overpopulating this poor world? And even so, you assume that all heteros will reproduce which is obscene.

    "Normal" with regards to what? Is this about religious beliefs or so?

    Such ignorance in the second paragraph. In what way would you compare having a sixth finger to being homosexual? That is by far the silliest comparison I've seen. Physically, humans have a set appearance, to out it plainly. Of course a sixth finger would not be normal because it would lead to debilitation. With homosexuality, no debilitation occurs. And even so, by using this idiotic analogy you presume that everyone in this world has the exact same preferences. Well, not at all.

    The second analogy is equally flawed. I don't get how your sexual preference is comparable to IQ measurements.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    :facepalm:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by acupofgreentea)
    That'd be a firm no.



    I'm so glad you exist.
    Aww! You're so sweet, I'm glad you exist as well :hugs:
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by newpersonage)
    Most homosexuals choose to be gay because it suits their combined genetic, physiological and social being. Being Gay is the extreme end of a normal spectrum of human sexual behaviour. No, I wouldn't delete any gene that made it slightly more likely.
    The research you've posted is 20-30 years old. Seriously?

    But still, to assert that people consciously "choose" to be gay is kinda ridiculous. There are gay people in societies where homosexuals face prison or even the death penalty. What makes you think that they chose to be gay?

    Also, your own argument kind of contradicts your first "source"

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    More prone to various mental disorders? What??
    It's not more difficult to find a partner, in fact. Statistically the chances are lower, yes, but that's it.
    About kids, why not adopt instead of overpopulating this poor world? And even so, you assume that all heteros will reproduce which is obscene.

    "Normal" with regards to what? Is this about religious beliefs or so?

    Such ignorance in the second paragraph. In what way would you compare having a sixth finger to being homosexual? That is by far the silliest comparison I've seen. Physically, humans have a set appearance, to out it plainly. Of course a sixth finger would not be normal because it would lead to debilitation. With homosexuality, no debilitation occurs. And even so, by using this idiotic analogy you presume that everyone in this world has the exact same preferences. Well, not at all.

    The second analogy is equally flawed. I don't get how your sexual preference is comparable to IQ measurements.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    PRSOM
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    :facepalm:
    Strong argument.

    (Well, I actually had a look over your threads and suffice it to say that your ignorance became a lot clearer. So, never mind)

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Hell 2 v NO!!! Being a homosexual myself, it is surprising how many people persecute you. Some one on the first page said that we are not real men, but dealing with this persecution makes us bigger men than others. Also, if you really think that the homosexual gene should be removed/ eradicated, stuff you. Your opinions are invalid and you are not model humans
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blondie987)
    I'm going to say this one more time so listen up: disabilities cause problems for people OUTSIDE of prejudice, surely you can't believe that the only thing that would bother a disabled person is not being accepted by others? Constantly having to take medication, pain, inability to learn none of which seem to have anything to do with bigotry. Homosexuality however, is only seen as something bad because of ignorance and prejudice-literally the only reason! So if you quote me again saying that they are the same I'll just assume you haven't read my post and are just continuously copying the same 'argument' you have made previously, I am not repeating myself again. Also, you seemed to have missed the point when I mentioned the bible (as an example), as I said, you are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you want but if you start a debate with me surrounding an issue that often brings up religion, I am going to challenge it! And there is plenty to challenge when it comes to EVERY religion. You have completely contradicted yourself when saying you wouldn't want to raise your child to believe that differences are wrong, that's exactly what you would be doing if you changed their genetics to make you happy. No, don't support incest (unlike certain religious texts) because of the obvious defects of lack of diversity in the gene pool, I'm bored of this argument now, I've made my points and you've ignored them, good day!
    Yes, that is exactly what I'm arguing. Society calls disabled people 'different' because they are the minority and therefore abnormal. The same can be said for homosexuality.
    In addition, homosexuality can cause problems outside of prejudice too. Like I said, people who are gay may want to suppress their sexuality because they don't see it as 'natural'. This doesn't necessarily tie in with the prejudice of others, it's their own perception of their sexuality. The same goes from trans people.
    Taking medication and being in pain is not only exclusive to people with disabilities.
    You can assume all you want. The only real difference is that one causes pain directly and the other causes pain indirectly. Even so, some disabilities cause indirect pain too. Not all disabilities result in direct physical pain. It's sometimes the act of feeling 'different' that can lead to the pain therefore making it indirect.
    I'm not repeating myself again either.
    I didn't bring up religion, you did. You go on as if religion is the only reason why someone would opt out of a homosexual child when the responses on this thread clearly suggest otherwise.
    I've contradicted myself? You're the one preaching about not changing who you are and never wanting to see your parents again if they tried to change you yet you said you'd change your own child. Would it be impossible for you to raise a disabled child? The development of health and social care certainly makes it very possible and can significantly improve the life chances of a disabled individual.
    You are also wanting to change their genetics to make yourself happy and your job as a parent easier.
    For someone who is against religion, you sure do speak a lot about it.
    Incestuous couples do not necessarily want to have children and if they do, there are other options aside from biologically, so your points about gene pool and defects is invalid. Isnt this one of the main arguments against someone calling homosexuality unnatural? You contradict yourself yet again.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Yes, that is exactly what I'm arguing. Society calls disabled people 'different' because they are the minority and therefore abnormal. The same can be said for homosexuality.
    In addition, homosexuality can cause problems outside of prejudice too. Like I said, people who are gay may want to suppress their sexuality because they don't see it as 'natural'. This doesn't necessarily tie in with the prejudice of others, it's their own perception of their sexuality. The same goes from trans people.
    Taking medication and being in pain is not only exclusive to people with disabilities.
    You can assume all you want. The only real difference is that one causes pain directly and the other causes pain indirectly. Even so, some disabilities cause indirect pain too. Not all disabilities result in direct physical pain. It's sometimes the act of feeling 'different' that can lead to the pain therefore making it indirect.
    I'm not repeating myself again either.
    I didn't bring up religion, you did. You go on as if religion is the only reason why someone would opt out of a homosexual child when the responses on this thread clearly suggest otherwise.
    I've contradicted myself? You're the one preaching about not changing who you are and never wanting to see your parents again if they tried to change you yet you said you'd change your own child. Would it be impossible for you to raise a disabled child? The development of health and social care certainly makes it very possible and can significantly improve the life chances of a disabled individual.
    You are also wanting to change their genetics to make yourself happy and your job as a parent easier.
    For someone who is against religion, you sure do speak a lot about it.
    Incestuous couples do not necessarily want to have children and if they do, there are other options aside from biologically, so your points about gene pool and defects is invalid. Isnt this one of the main arguments against someone calling homosexuality unnatural? You contradict yourself yet again.
    I said good day!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    It's not really the most severe, disabilities by definition lead to some obvious loss of mental or physical capacity. This is not comparable with homosexuality - the person is not suffering loss of mental or physical capacity. Acceptance in one case is vastly different to acceptance in the other. In the latter, it's based purely on personal beliefs and nothing more or less. In the former case, however, you have to accept that in some way your communication with the other person will be impaired, and many people find this too much of a hassle. I have volunteered for people with a range of conditions and let me tell you it took a lot of patience and good will to maintain a conversation. Regardless of the degree, the vast majority of conditions recognised as disabilities are debilitating. As before, this may applicable to every case of disability, but I would argue that it is in the majority of cases.

    Well, I will drop the second argument because that is more so an opinion rather than a factual difference. I do disagree nonetheless!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Bit harsh. Disability does not necessarily lead to 'obvious' loss of mental or physical capacity.
    The homosexual individual is more likely to suffer with significant mental issues. Not definitely I know, but the same can be said for disability. People with disabilities are constantly defying odds and are becoming more able to do things that doctors said they wouldn't. In addition, their disability may not necessarily be as severe or as bad as it seems. You can never truly know this until they are born.
    That's not true. Having a disability doesn't always mean that your communication will be impaired and even if it is, is this so much of an issue that you'd rather not have the child?
    The vast majority of severe disabilities are debilitating.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    The research you've posted is 20-30 years old. Seriously?

    But still, to assert that people consciously "choose" to be gay is kinda ridiculous. There are gay people in societies where homosexuals face prison or even the death penalty. What makes you think that they chose to be gay?

    Also, your own argument kind of contradicts your first "source"
    Sexual preference is a biological continuum like weight. At some times and places in human history, such as Ancient Greece, but also elsewhere, a large proportion of males would have a period in which they were homosexual.

    Sexual preference is like any other biological continuum like weight or height. Most people can control their weight but many cannot. I assumed that the reader would understand this. For most people weight is indeed a choice.

    The only reason that a reader might get upset by the idea that you can choose to be Gay is that they are in one of three groups. The first group is strongly against being Gay, or far to the hetero side of the spectrum, as a result they could not conceive of having sex with their own sex. The second group is highly politicised Gays who enjoy the dialectical properties of differences in sexual behaviour (ie: Gay "Liberation" . Objectively, like the Greeks etc., most of us can choose to be Gay. The third group, which we know from the days in which being Gay was banned by draconian measures, is very small, perhaps less than 1%, is composed of those who, like people who cannot lose weight, are Gay and cannot be other than Gay.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blondie987)
    I said good day!
    If you didn't want a response, you should have never replied.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    If you didn't want a response, you should have never replied.
    I said GOOD DAYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    How are your GCSEs going so far?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.