can we cure gay people

[troubles1]

I will start by saying that I am not trying to offend anyone, I'm hoping to get people to discuss this and what the possible outcome could in-sue..
We all hear the common statement from the gay community stating 'Do you think we would choose to be this way? That in itself can be taken that they are ashamed or know that what they are doing is not a natural function in human society. And if they had a choice they would opt to be heterosexual..reaserch

That is one of many current research programs being preformed by science to isolate the Gay gene, this one deals with sheep, alto I did find the part about transsexual cats amusing.
;
And of course, we could be. The discovery of the "gay gene", which most of us are convinced exists, will be a double-edged sword for gays and lesbians when and if it happens. On the one hand, it would demolish forever the argument that gays "choose" their orientation and are thus undeserving of protected minority status like African-Americans or the handicapped. But on the other hand, if the exact cause of our sexual orientation could be determined, it would be no time at all before science offered a "cure" for homosexuality --, or the opportunity for parents who might be "at risk" of giving birth to a gay son or lesbian daughter. And if the cure turned out to be too expensive -- well, there would be another option for parents who didn't want the responsibility of bringing a "different" child into the world. Thanks to Roe v. Wade, they could always choose abortion.

What's that you say? No woman would choose to abort a child simply because of his or her sexual orientation? I'm "fear-mongering" in an effort to drive a wedge between gay activists and the pro-choice movement?

If some women are already having abortions because the child they're carrying is of the "wrong" sex, do you really think that women in the future will hesitate to abort a child because he or she has the "wrong" sexual orientation? Remember, one of the grounds on which pro-choice-rs justify abortion is that every child should be "wanted." You don't want a gay child? Fine! You can get rid of it.Aborting a gay fetice

Now if as many Gay's claim that they are Born this way, and can not change , Should we as society do everything we can to cure them of this affliction?
There argument goes like this: “Just as a person cannot help being black, female, or Asian, I cannot help being homosexual. We were all born this way, and as such we should be treated equally.” However, this argument fails to comprehend the true “civil rights” movements. The law already protects the civil rights of everyone—black, white, male, female, homosexual, or heterosexual. Homosexuals enjoy the same civil rights everyone else does. The contention arises when specific laws deprive all citizens of certain behaviors (e.g., sodomy, etc.). We should keep in mind that these laws are the same for all members of society. Because of certain deprivations, homosexuals feel as though “equal” rights have been taken away (i.e., marriage, tax breaks, etc.).

Skin color and other genetic traits can be traced through inheritance patterns and simple Mendelian genetics. Homosexuals are identified not by a trait or a gene, but rather by their actions. Without the action, they would be indistinguishable from all other people. It is only when they alter their behavior that they become a group that is recognized as being different.

If we were to assume momentarily that homosexuality was genetic, then the most one could conclude is that those individuals were not morally responsible for being homosexual. However, that does not mean that they are not morally responsible for homosexual actions! Merely having the gene would not force one to carry out the behavior.

For instance, if scientists were able to document that a “rape gene” existed, we certainly would not blame an individual for possessing this gene, but neither would we allow him to act upon that rape disposition?

In closing the questions I am asking you and what your input is.
1...Are people Born Gay?and if so is it a gene that is causing there attraction?
2...If they are Born that way are the responsible for there actions and ignore there feelings? like the hypothecial rape gene?
3...If we locate the gene should we eradicate it from humans? since most gay even stat they would not choose to be gay?
4...For all you liberals who are for abortion or the pro-choice movement, And we know most fathers do not want a gay son, or parents in general would rather there children be straight if for no other reason that to have Grandchildren. should Aborting unwanted gay babies be Allowed? so the parent can try again?
5.. .If it becomes as simple as swallowing a pill, or a medical Procedure should the Government intervene and cure the Gay's of there disorder, like in the case of a rape gene?

[Begoner]

Then we can also cure blacks of their disorder while we're at it. Maybe we can cure everybody who is not a perfect replica of a typical white Christian of their "defects."

[fli]

At 11/28/06 03:26 PM, troubles1 wrote: And if they had a choice they would opt to be heterosexual...

No, not all gays would want to be hetero.
I wouldn't because I shouldn't be the one to change, it's the people around me who should.

On the one hand, it would demolish forever the argument that gays "choose" their orientation and are thus undeserving of protected minority status like African-Americans or the handicapped.

What about the religious? They chose their religion, yet they're freedoms are protected even though religion isn't a biological property of people.

Even if homosexuality was a choice, that choice should be protected.

well, there would be another option for parents who didn't want the responsibility of bringing a "different" child into the world. Thanks to Roe v. Wade, they could always choose abortion.

It would be their personal choice.
I don't personally agree with it, but... hey-- It's not my spawn.

The law already protects the civil rights of everyone—black, white, male, female, homosexual, or heterosexual. Homosexuals enjoy the same civil rights everyone else does. The contention arises when specific laws deprive all citizens of certain behaviors (e.g., sodomy, etc.). We should keep in mind that these laws are the same for all members of society. Because of certain deprivations, homosexuals feel as though “equal” rights have been taken away (i.e., marriage, tax breaks, etc.).

By that same logic, I could say that you are also denied the right to marry a consentual same sex member of your community.

Of course this is a civil rights manner for gays, they can't marry even though they need a marriage and they are subject to many problems which are three times more complicated when there are children, family, inherentance and divorce in the mix.

Married couples at least have that legal precedent and gay couples don't.

Skin color and other genetic traits can be traced through inheritance patterns and simple Mendelian genetics. Homosexuals are identified not by a trait or a gene, but rather by their actions. Without the action, they would be indistinguishable from all other people. It is only when they alter their behavior that they become a group that is recognized as being different.

If we were to assume momentarily that homosexuality was genetic, then the most one could conclude is that those individuals were not morally responsible for being homosexual. However, that does not mean that they are not morally responsible for homosexual actions! Merely having the gene would not force one to carry out the behavior.

For instance, if scientists were able to document that a “rape gene” existed, we certainly would not blame an individual for possessing this gene, but neither would we allow him to act upon that rape disposition?

Of course you are comparing rape to homosexuality-- one is consentual and the other isn't.
Now let's compare apples and oranges.

Or how a car accident is like Chernobyl's accident.

In closing the questions I am asking you and what your input is.
1...Are people Born Gay?and if so is it a gene that is causing there attraction?
2...If they are Born that way are the responsible for there actions and ignore there feelings? like the hypothecial rape gene?
3...If we locate the gene should we eradicate it from humans? since most gay even stat they would not choose to be gay?
4...For all you liberals who are for abortion or the pro-choice movement, And we know most fathers do not want a gay son, or parents in general would rather there children be straight if for no other reason that to have Grandchildren. should Aborting unwanted gay babies be Allowed? so the parent can try again?
5.. .If it becomes as simple as swallowing a pill, or a medical Procedure should the Government intervene and cure the Gay's of there disorder, like in the case of a rape gene?

[raggedclaws]

It has been postulated that some animals engage in homosexual behavior as a means of population control. Some have even been known to change genders based on the current ratio in their ecosystem.

It is possible that there is a gay gene and that we are all carriers, some of us just haven't been in the right circumstances to trigger it. For example, would an area with a very dense population have a higher instance of homosexuals per capita than less populated one?

If this is the case, in addition to the moral question of altering someones genetics to fit social norms what would be the ecological ramifications of "curing" homosexuality and having those people breeding when they otherwise wouldn't have offspring?

Not trying to be all tree-hugger about this, just a random thought.

[JakeHero]

If a gay gene does exist it'll be alot easier to get rid of homosexuality.

eugenics anyone?

[Kev-o]

At 11/28/06 03:26 PM, troubles1 wrote: Stuff

Can we cure ignorance, and intolerance? Homosexuality is natural, the end.

[Memorize]

At 11/28/06 03:31 PM, Begoner wrote: Then we can also cure blacks of their disorder while we're at it. Maybe we can cure everybody who is not a perfect replica of a typical white Christian of their "defects."

Way to not read.

Hey Begoner, you're stupid showing.

[Kev-o]

At 11/28/06 07:52 PM, Techware wrote:

Hey Begoner, you're stupid showing.

How old are you? Oh, and you left out the 'is'.

[Athlas]

You simply don't have the right to intervene with people's private lives, let alone tamper with their genes. What you stick in who is no one's business.

Besides, homosexually is quite common among most mammals, so it's hardly something to be ashamed of.

[Begoner]

Way to not read.

I read what he posted, and it was disgusting trash. It was bigoted and irrational -- homosexuality is not an "affliction" of which somebody needs to be "cured." His whole argument was solely founded upon his homophobia and is completely invalid.

[AtomicTerrorist]

At 11/28/06 03:31 PM, Begoner wrote: Then we can also cure blacks of their disorder while we're at it. Maybe we can cure everybody who is not a perfect replica of a typical white Christian of their "defects."

um... big difference between blacks and gays. one is a race, the other is a screw up

lol

hmm... last time i checked, christians werent all white. and christians arent the only ones against gays.

[JakeHero]

The fact the anus can be ruptured from sodomy kinda speaks volumes if its naturally intended.....

[Jose]

At 11/28/06 07:52 PM, Techware wrote:

At 11/28/06 03:31 PM, Begoner wrote: Then we can also cure blacks of their disorder while we're at it. Maybe we can cure everybody who is not a perfect replica of a typical white Christian of their "defects."

Way to not read.

Hey Begoner, you're stupid showing.

Wait a tick: you are stupid showing?

Hey Techware, your stupid is showing.

[Dash-Underscore-Dash]

"Cure" isn't a very nice word, how about "sexual reorientation"?

[MortifiedPenguins]

Better idea.

Can we kill gay people off.

Then, no more gay people.

And Disco sales will fall forever.

[cellardoor6]

At 11/28/06 07:50 PM, Kev-o wrote:

At 11/28/06 03:26 PM, troubles1 wrote: Stuff

Can we cure ignorance, and intolerance? Homosexuality is natural, the end.

If homosexuality was natural then homosexuals would be able to reproduce and self-sustain.

Homosexuality is not natural, it occurs in other mammals, but those same mammals also mate with the opposite sex in order to preproduce.

Now, if you isolate all the gay people of the world, then they would die off in a generation. Thats not natural.

[AtomicTerrorist]

At 11/28/06 09:28 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: Better idea.

Can we kill gay people off.

Then, no more gay people.

And Disco sales will fall forever.

thats an amazing idea! we should do it.

(8)CLang Clang Clang
*waits for someone to respond*
*hears "To the trolley", and goes to kill the gay (American Dad joke)

[Proteas]

At 11/28/06 07:57 PM, Begoner wrote: His whole argument was solely founded upon his homophobia and is completely invalid.

*yawn*

This whole "self-righteous indignation of whatever is being posted" schtick is getting old, man.

At 11/28/06 08:42 PM, BanditByte wrote: The fact the anus can be ruptured from sodomy kinda speaks volumes if its naturally intended.....

The fact the vagina can be ruptured from coitus kinda speaks volumes if it's naturally intended....

See what I did there?

[Robbodestroyo]

There is no such thing as the "Gay Gene". Just think about it. How could a gay gene exist if gay people don't naturally reproduce? When gay people do reproduce, why don't their children end up gay. If you look at the basics of genetics, a gay gene shouldn't exist and will probablly never exist. Actually, if anything, the gene is a mutation that is made to cut out the weak in the species by making them not reproduce. So just the idea of a "gay gene" is silly. It was just made to explain why some people ended up gay. I think being gay is entirely a psycological ordeal, that comes from either early childhood stimuly, or some traumatic event in a persons life time.

[RedSkunk]

I have not been persuaded either way in terms of the "nature versus nurture" question of homosexuality. I do believe it's a combination (but again, which is more important? Who knows).

But "curing" it? Why? Seems trivial. If homosexuality is totally chemical / genetic, and we can effectively "solve" it... Then I think we ought to focus on more pressing concerns. Say, diabetes.

[RedSkunk]

At 11/28/06 09:53 PM, Robbodestroyo wrote: There is no such thing as the "Gay Gene". Just think about it. How could a gay gene exist if gay people don't naturally reproduce? When gay people do reproduce, why don't their children end up gay.

Well, calling it a "gay gene" is an oversimplification, obviously. But if homosexuality is a result of biological factors, it'd be a combination of genes contributing to this phenotype. Most people would likely have most or all of these genes that contribute to it, but they would not be expressed. Telling people to "look at the basis of genetics" was kinda hypocritical, your post doesn't indicate a firm understanding of the subject..

[JakeHero]

At 11/28/06 09:47 PM, Proteas wrote: The fact the vagina can be ruptured from coitus kinda speaks volumes if it's naturally intended....

See what I did there?

Nope, considering I've never heard of a girl's volva being ripped from having something in it, despite the fact it was designed flexible enough to squeeze out an infant.

The point I'm trying to make is not whether people are born gay or not, but rather is homosexuality the product of evolutionary change. According to trial and error: if this form of sexual preference was intended either the anus would evolve to become more elastic so not to damage it during insertion or the lining would become more durable. So I have my doubts whether or not sodomy is naturally intended.

[Jose]

At 11/28/06 10:36 PM, BanditByte wrote:
Nope, considering I've never heard of a girl's volva being ripped from having something in it, despite the fact it was designed flexible enough to squeeze out an infant.

"An enlarged vagina is frequently a problem after childbirth, especially after multiple children, or vaginal delivery of a large baby or difficult delivery. Typically, the vagina and its supporting muscles and tissues, becomes stretched and torn during childbirth—sadly, it almost never returns to its pre-pregnancy state, once normal childbirth has occurred."

Googled the words torn and labia.

[RedSkunk]

At 11/28/06 10:36 PM, BanditByte wrote: The point I'm trying to make is not whether people are born gay or not, but rather is homosexuality the product of evolutionary change. According to trial and error: if this form of sexual preference was intended either the anus would evolve to become more elastic so not to damage it during insertion or the lining would become more durable. So I have my doubts whether or not sodomy is naturally intended.

You're working off of the flawed assumption that sodomy is an integral part of homosexuality. And EVEN IF it was, the assumption that sodomy would kill off small people / favor those with large openings seems wrong. The number dying from sodomy is small, and being "good" or "bad" at receiving doesn't seem to change your chances of procreating. Doesn't seem to have any effect at all in terms of evolution.

[Proteas]

At 11/28/06 10:36 PM, BanditByte wrote: Nope, considering I've never heard of a girl's volva being ripped from having something in it, despite the fact it was designed flexible enough to squeeze out an infant.

It's a muscle just like anything else in the body, and it (along with the pereneum) can be torn if enough pressure is applied to it.

To say that the link I just provided would be graphic is an understatement.

[Jose]

At 11/28/06 10:49 PM, Proteas wrote:
To say that the link I just provided would be graphic is an understatement.

Fourth-degree vaginal tear FTW.

That has to hurt.

[SolInvictus]

we tried, it really didn't work.

[ironzealot]

At 11/28/06 03:31 PM, Begoner wrote: Then we can also cure blacks of their disorder while we're at it. Maybe we can cure everybody who is not a perfect replica of a typical white Christian of their "defects."

enough with the histrionics already. If homosexuality is indeed a genetic condition, it would be a genetic defect. The singular purpose of sexuality is reproduction, sex between two members of the same gender cannot facilitate the production of children and serves no biological/reproductive/evolutionary purpose, thus same-sex attraction is not a natural result of our evolutionary development and is, in fact, a defect.

It is not an obviously harmful defect, so there is no strong imperative for a "cure", but to get all offended because someone suggests that is not the intended state of one's sexuality is moronic. As is likening the suggestion of a "cure" to a cure for "blackness"

[ironzealot]

At 11/28/06 10:04 PM, RedSkunk wrote:

:But if homosexuality is a result of biological factors, it'd be a combination of genes contributing to this phenotype.

phenotype are the observable physical characteristics derived from a combination of genetic and environmental influences, it has nothing to do with behavior

[SolInvictus]

At 11/28/06 11:03 PM, ironzealot wrote: The singular purpose of sexuality is reproduction

and pleasure/sexual gratification.