"Scientists may have found a biological basis for homosexuality. That could be bad news for gay rights."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 21, 2013 11:56 PM GMT
    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/06/biological_basis_for_homosexuality_the_fraternal_birth_order_explanation.html

    In recent years, scientists have proposed various speculative biological bases for homosexuality but never settled on an answer. As researchers draw closer to uncovering an explanation, however, a new question has arisen: What if in some cases sexuality is caused by an identifiable chemical process in the womb? What if, in other words, homosexuality can potentially be prevented? That is one implication of one of the most widely accepted hypotheses thus far proposed. And if it’s true, it could turn out to be a blow for the gay rights movement.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 12:14 AM GMT
    Even if it is 'preventable' from birth who cares? Shouldn't people be allowed to live their lives regardless of that? Religion is a choice and yet people are allowed to partake in that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 12:54 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    [...] What if, in other words, homosexuality can potentially be prevented? That is one implication of one of the most widely accepted hypotheses thus far proposed. And if it’s true, it could turn out to be a blow for the gay rights movement.


    Funny thing: the article says, "researchers calculate that about 15 to 30 percent of gay men have the fraternal birth order effect to thank for their homosexuality." Even if the chemical mechanism that causes this phenomenon could be found, even if we wanted to reverse it, we would still only catch 15 to 30 percent of homosexuality.

    If you ask the question hypothetically, what would happen if there was a test that determines if the baby is gay, I would have a field day seeing the inner dynamic of abortion foes that find themselves pregnant with a gay baby. What to do?

    If, again hypothetically, there were a pill that would turn your baby straight, I wonder what the side effects would turn out to be. Is a missing limb too much to pay for a straight baby?

    And even if there were a super-safe pill that turns all babies straight without side effect: just like the LGBTQ activist quoted in the article, I do believe that a stable mechanism like this clearly is an evolutionary trait that favors the advancement of the species.

    Or, in the words of Lady Gaga, "God makes no mistakes." If He created gay people, there must have been a good reason, and it's not to give straight people someone to hunt down.
  • heyom

    Posts: 389

    Jul 22, 2013 1:03 AM GMT
    It is equal to wanting to control the sex of the baby. And that too is a rights issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:03 AM GMT


    OK, so if an in utero cure for most babies with spina bifida were found, how would that damage equal rights for people with spina bifida?

    Hmmm...here's a better one, if a drug was found to choose sex in utero, how would that damage equal rights for men and women?

    "Sorry, ma'am, but because sex can be selected in the womb, you're not allowed to vote, or marry. "


    O.o
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:04 AM GMT
    This is definitely interesting.

    Of course, having the option to cancel out whatever factor that causes a fetus to be gay implies that there is somehow something "wrong" with being homosexual, as though it's a genetic defect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:05 AM GMT
    I don't think we have anything to be concerned about. Homosexuality is not genetic. They will never find a gay gene, and thus we won't ever be treated as though we have a disease.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:08 AM GMT
    These are interesting points.

    If there is truth to it, it is bound to start a big debate. If the same people who are against homosexuality also believe in the sacred nature of life, then obviously they should have a problem trying to change a baby before he/she has been born.

    And as someone else said here, don't they believe that god doesn't make mistakes?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:11 AM GMT
    Do people really think that it's some wildly crazy coincidence multi million and billion dollar creative industries such as fine art, fashion and beauty are almost exclusively populated by gay people? We're not biological mistakes just "trying to get by". We have extremely valuable things to offer the world because we're gay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:19 AM GMT
    Conversely I would never be in favor of a method that would prevent heterosexuality but during a time when our population exceeds our resources, your mad scientists might decide to limit the number of breeders born. Perhaps they'd choose to do fetal makeovers so that half the new kids would be gay.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:23 AM GMT
    Jim2013 saidConversely I would never be in favor of a method that would prevent heterosexuality but during a time when our population exceeds our resources, your mad scientists might decide to limit the number of breeders born. Perhaps they'd choose to do fetal makeovers so that half the new kids would be gay.



    BINGO.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:29 AM GMT
    Y'all really shouldn't joke about that. The human race should never believe it has the moral fibre to use such power in accord with morality, right reason, and right judgment. It makes me shudder.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:31 AM GMT
    KJSharp said The human race should never believe it has the moral fibre to use such power in accord with morality, right reason, and right judgment. It makes me shudder.


    The human race has consistently tried to modify "the human race" on a large scale in some way or form ever since it has existed (genocide anyone?).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:37 AM GMT
    Matiz said
    KJSharp said The human race should never believe it has the moral fibre to use such power in accord with morality, right reason, and right judgment. It makes me shudder.


    The human race has consistently tried to modify "the human race" on a large scale in some way or form ever since it has existed (genocide anyone?).


    That's why I said what I said....are you trying to disagree with me in some way?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:42 AM GMT
    KJSharp said
    Matiz said
    KJSharp said The human race should never believe it has the moral fibre to use such power in accord with morality, right reason, and right judgment. It makes me shudder.


    The human race has consistently tried to modify "the human race" on a large scale in some way or form ever since it has existed (genocide anyone?).


    That's why I said what I said....are you trying to disagree with me in some way?


    You made it sound like this would put the human race in a position to do something it's never done before, when it fact, it's already been consistently doing it since the concept of society sparked into being.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:49 AM GMT
    Matiz said
    You made it sound like this would put the human race in a position to do something it's never done before, when it fact, it's already been consistently doing it since the concept of society sparked into being.


    I didn't mean to imply that. We shouldn't believe we have the moral fibre to use such power in large part because we've misused such power in the past.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 1:58 AM GMT
    Let's begin this panic at a slow pace.

    What might scientists do to end gayness is probably less of a threat than say 'massive environmental collapse' so let's prioritize our causes for hysteria.

    Genocide? Widespread political failure leading to a final war that kills us all? Yeah, those are possible too.

    I can't think of anything comforting to say but I do know that I won't be adding 'Scientists Against Gays' to my list of worries.
  • LJay

    Posts: 11612

    Jul 22, 2013 2:18 AM GMT
    "It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature."
  • disasterpiece

    Posts: 2991

    Jul 22, 2013 2:23 AM GMT
    If this world was gayless, it would seriously suck. Can you imagine ? It'd be depressing.

    And people would have ugly hair. And clothes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 2:30 AM GMT
    The human race has consistently tried to modify "the human race" on a large scale in some way or form ever since it has existed (genocide anyone?).

    No thanks, I'm trying to quit.
  • Rhi_Bran

    Posts: 904

    Jul 22, 2013 2:34 AM GMT
    But if gay people weren’t born that way, if scientists were unable to find any biological basis for sexual orientation, then the Family Research Council crowd could claim vindication in its fight to label homosexuality unnatural, harmful, and against nature.

    Doesn't matter, that's still an appeal to nature fallacy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 2:58 AM GMT
    riddler78 saidhttp://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/06/biological_basis_for_homosexuality_the_fraternal_birth_order_explanation.html

    In recent years, scientists have proposed various speculative biological bases for homosexuality but never settled on an answer. As researchers draw closer to uncovering an explanation, however, a new question has arisen: What if in some cases sexuality is caused by an identifiable chemical process in the womb? What if, in other words, homosexuality can potentially be prevented? That is one implication of one of the most widely accepted hypotheses thus far proposed. And if it’s true, it could turn out to be a blow for the gay rights movement.


    Gentics and chemical interactions define who we are. We've engaged in selective breeding since the beginning of civilization, and, now... we have the ability to engineer ourselves, and, as science advances, and we learn the various biological systems, we have an ability to completely re-engineer the species...if we want. It's just a matter of time.

    We've known about the effects of genetics, and various chemical pathways for a long time, and, as our understanding of these systems grows, we'll be able to engineer them. Religion nuts will fight it...as they always have, but, science will continue to evolve.

    If we have the ability to prevent, say heart disease, type 1 diabetes, etc.... Should we? Most folks would say yes. Gene sequences aren't magic. The lab will grown you a new one. We have those abilities now.

    Science is not evil but how we use it always brings ethical questions. Science is empowering, wether it's The Internet, a nuclear weapon, modern medicine, livestock production, or genetic engineering.

    If someone decides they want a straight kid, with blue eyes, and blond hair, in the not to distant future, the science will be there to do so.

    Many things will be fixed pre-birth. We' fix many diseases well before they happen. Others, we'll treat with new body parts, made from our own genes. They are doing it ALREADY.

    Fascinating stuff, and an eventuality that's on the timeline somewhere in front of us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 3:06 AM GMT
    Cure for homosexuality or overpopulation?
  • Ezgoing

    Posts: 52

    Jul 22, 2013 3:07 AM GMT
    Seriously that has to be an American research. When will they do like Canada and not just accept it and celebrate it. Im bi and it has nothing to do with any given birth hormone. My physical body has a prostate and it likes to be stimulated, thats how the body was created from day one, we look back in history and just because a Catholic Pope couldnt get any he decided to condone it and from that they on religion has been the biggest obstacle to sexuality either gay or straight. Bisexuality has existed since the beginning of time, the crusades ... our biggest manly heroes has boytoys even Popes and Kings.
    Why even waste our time with such stupid research.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 22, 2013 3:09 AM GMT
    If anything this proves that homosexuality is not a choice.