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

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Ah, but equally you could say that if everyone replaced the gene, it wouldn't matter whether people are okay with homosexuality or not, because homosexuality would simply no longer exist. Homophobic bullying would not only "dramatically fall", it would eventually be totally eradicated.
    If we killed all Muslims at birth, that would also get rid of "Islamophobia". Do you also favour that policy?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    This is a completely bogus line of argumentation given gay people can and do have children.
    I wasn't talking about gay people, I was using the analogy of forcing straight people to have children.

    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    It's clear from this thread that people will try any excuse, and if held up on one will move to another, to justify their determination to use eugenics to wipe out a natural variation that they are prejudiced against
    It's natural and perfectly reasonable to want your children to be similar to you.

    I enjoy science fiction stories, and I would like my children to enjoy them as well. If they don't, so be it, but given the choice I would prefer they would.

    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    Well said. If everyone opted for this procedure then it would essentially result in wiping out the gay population (and it's possible that this would actually happen in certain countries in the world).
    Can you explain why this would be objectively a bad thing? It wouldn't result in the deaths of any individuals, but would just mean a particular trait would no longer exist.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    If we killed all Muslims at birth, that would also get rid of "Islamophobia". Do you also favour that policy?
    Why would I favour killing children?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cheato)
    Hmm I think if most were honest they would.
    Bigots certainly would. But as the poll here shows, a majority oppose it and this is consistent with the attitudes to gay people in life.

    If you have gay children, they're unlikely to produce you grandchildren.
    That's ********. Being gay doesn't mean my sperm magically doesn't work. Gay people have children all the time, I have gay friends with children and they seem to be popping them out at the same rate as my straight friends.

    But any excuse will do, right? Tell yourself it's "for the children"
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Why would I favour killing children?
    You're right, that would be unneccessary as part of your eugenics programme. If we simply switch off the Islam gene, then no more Muslims and no more Islamophobia
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    It wouldn't be forcing the child though. If someone want's their children to have children, obviously they would prefer their children to want to have children. This doesn't mean they wouldn't accept their children if they chose not to.
    It kind of is forcing your child - you've changed natural biology to benefit your views of society without asking your child first. Variations in sexuality is normal and not harmful in itself. Why do it?

    (Original post by Gavin2016)
    What about if it was the pedo gene, would you replace that gene?
    You're seriously comparing homosexuality to paedophilia? The former has no effect on how you live your life and doesn't harm those around you. The latter is a potential danger to the well-being of others. Even so, I still don't think it's a reason to alter their genes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    Can you explain why this would be objectively a bad thing?
    You want me to explain to you why it would be a bad thing to use eugenics to wipe out a historically-oppressed and marginalised group?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Why would I favour killing children?
    You do agree that getting rid of Muslims through various genetic methods would lead to the end of Islamophobia, and Islamophobia is a bad thing in your mind and thus you support this policy?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antonyzac)
    Why do it?
    The real question is, if a bigot is given an opportunity to get rid of a group he dislikes using methods that can superficially be justified as "for the children", why wouldn't he?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aghaagha)
    And your point is...


    The embarrassing attempts at rationalising prejudice/bigotry on this thread are most amusing.
    The whole point of this thread is to hear different opinions and views, if you are going to belittle others, then there is no point to this thread.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by setarcos)
    The whole point of this thread is to hear different opinions and views
    Aghagha was expressing an opinion. It sounds like you want to shut down opinions you don't agree with (particularly those that are embarrassing for the pro camp)

    then there is no point to this thread.
    Now you're onto something. Essentially asking the question "Should gay people be wiped out using eugenics methods?" is highly offensive
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Perhaps, but at least my own child won't be carrying that stigma.
    That exact sentence sums up exactly why 50% of people would change the gene. You've based your opinion on gene modification on the fact of your child suffering stigmatisation. Ask this question again in 50 years time and I guarantee the number of people who view homosexuality as negative will be in the very small minority. Your views change with society, and the only way to prevent this completely unjustified genetic modification of a completely harmless variation is to change society. There is literally no other way of doing it. If it's your only option, then you have to do it somehow, and mass collectivisation is the only way.


    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Ah, but equally you could say that if everyone replaced the gene, it wouldn't matter whether people are okay with homosexuality or not, because homosexuality would simply no longer exist. Homophobic bullying would not only "dramatically fall", it would eventually be totally eradicated.
    If homosexuality were caused by a genetic mutation, it wouldn't cease to exist just because people remove it. Straight people have gay children; it's most likely a random mutation. It will always exist.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    You're right, that would be unneccessary as part of your eugenics programme. If we simply switch off the Islam gene, then no more Muslims and no more Islamophobia
    You do agree that getting rid of Muslims through various genetic methods would lead to the end of Islamophobia, and Islamophobia is a bad thing in your mind and thus you support this policy?
    That's true. But equally, if you implant a "Muslim gene" into every child at birth, then everyone would be Muslim and that would also get rid of Islamophobia.

    See my point? It makes no sense that the other poster says "Everybody should choose this option, because that would dramatically reduce bullying", since even if everyone chose the other option, it would also dramatically reduce bullying.


    Besides, this choice isn't about getting rid of Homophobia, Islamophobia or whatever on a worldwide scale. In the OP's scenario, I'm only in control of my own decision and what happens to my own child, not anybody else's. So it's hardly a "eugenics programme". No matter what my decision, homosexual people and homophobia would still exist; my concern is to ensure that my own child isn't subject to it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antonyzac)
    It kind of is forcing your child - you've changed natural biology to benefit your views of society without asking your child first. Variations in sexuality is normal and not harmful in itself. Why do it?
    It's not necessarily anything to do with views of society, but what you want your child to be. You shape your child by the partner you chose, and the way you bring them up, changing one trait before they began to develop seems pretty reasonable.

    If variations in sexuality is normal and not harmful, why would it be an issue to change it before it has even developed?

    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    You want me to explain to you why it would be a bad thing to use eugenics to wipe out a historically-oppressed and marginalised group?
    Yes.


    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    You're right, that would be unneccessary as part of your eugenics programme. If we simply switch off the Islam gene, then no more Muslims and no more Islamophobia
    I would support such a move without hesitation.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeoAngliae)
    Aghagha was expressing an opinion. It sounds like you want to shut down opinions you don't agree with (particularly those that are embarrassing for the pro camp)
    I have not expressed any views on this topic so far, but hey I don't want to get into an argument with you so I'll drop it.
    (But nothing wrong with being a bit more balanced in your argument before jumping to conclusions )
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    It's not necessarily anything to do with views of society, but what you want your child to be. You shape your child by the partner you chose, and the way you bring them up, changing one trait before they began to develop seems pretty reasonable.

    If variations in sexuality is normal and not harmful, why would it be an issue to change it before it has even developed?
    You want your child to be what is "normal", and "normal" is relational. You relate normal to that of society's values. It's ignorant to think your view has nothing to do with society.

    Genetic modification is an intervention that shouldn't be taken lightly. It's altering harmless natural variation based on backward human logic of the harmless variation being wrong. Besides, as I argued to someone else, you won't be able to wipe out homosexuality as if it were a virus because it's an intrinsic mutation, most likely random.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    X
    Sorry, I missed the comment you were replying to. I see your point, it's very strange indeed to say that it's perpetuating bullying or making a statement that you're okay with it not to replace the gene.

    No matter what my decision, homosexual people and homophobia would still exist; my concern is to ensure that my own child isn't subject to it.
    Leaving aside the technical issues, given the entire thread is highly speculative, if it was found there was a gene associated with Islam/religiosity, would you be okay with people removing it from their children?

    Ideally, I would not want my child to get involved with the delusion of religion. There are particular risks associated with the Islamic lifestyle (for example, the converts who have joined ISIS) that I would not want my child subjected to. Do you believe that it would be someone's right to do that in precisely the way you seek to remove homosexuality from their genetic makeup?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by antonyzac)
    That exact sentence sums up exactly why 50% of people would change the gene. You've based your opinion on gene modification on the fact of your child suffering stigmatisation. Ask this question again in 50 years time and I guarantee the number of people who view homosexuality as negative will be in the very small minority. Your views change with society, and the only way to prevent this completely unjustified genetic modification of a completely harmless variation is to change society. There is literally no other way of doing it. If it's your only option, then you have to do it somehow, and mass collectivisation is the only way.
    I don't really understand this point.

    It's not my priority to change society for the better, it's my priority to ensure that my child is as best off as possible, based on how society is now and however it may turn out in 50 years time. I think being heterosexual gives him or her a better chance of that.

    If homosexuality were caused by a genetic mutation, it wouldn't cease to exist just because people remove it. Straight people have gay children; it's most likely a random mutation. It will always exist.
    But we're assuming everyone removes it, aren't we? That is, even when the next gay child is conceived, his parents also replace his gene and make him straight. In that case, homosexuality would not exist.

    So it makes no sense to try and reduce bullying by saying "nobody should replace the gene" when you could also reduce bullying if everyone replaced it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    Yes.
    If you lack the intellectual capacity and moral fortitude to understand why it would be undesirable to use eugenics to wipe out a historically-persecuted group, then it's probably not worth my time to try to explain it to you. Perhaps a bit like trying to explain mathematics to a dog; try as you might, it simply lacks the capacity for the subject matter.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Probably a more relevant question is, "Would you abort a child if they carried the homosexual gene?"

    It's much more likely that termination rather than gene therapy in the womb would be technically plausible.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Break up or unrequited love?
  • 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.