207 réponses à ce sujet

[Inquisitor Recon]

Since when does futuristic genetic treatment equal killing and sterilizing an entire population based on their religious and ethnic background? A weak argument.

[Kaiser Shepard]

I wanted to quote Orson Scott Card to end this discussion, but allow me to play the devil's advocate instead: Is it really gay when it's between different species? Procreation obviously isn't possible anymore, so what sex your alien is doesn't really matter.

[LiquidGrape]

ReconTeam wrote...



Genetically treating it would be best for the individual and humanity as a whole.

Homogenization; solving humanity's problems since 1927!

[catabuca]

ReconTeam wrote...

catabuca wrote...
Who gets to decide if homosexuality should be 'cured'? Straight people? Ever thought homosexuals quite like being who they are? There is nothing to 'cure' here, because there is no disease. To argue otherwise merely shows up your ignorance.

When you put it that way perhaps us "ignorant" straight people should get to decide. It doesn't benefit anybody else, it leads to all sorts of confrontation, at least half the world agrees that it is is immoral and wrong, it is a less than healthy practice, and if they are genetically treated they certainly won't miss being gay. What sort of parent would want their child to live as such? Not a very good one in my opinion.

Genetically treating it would be best for the individual and humanity as a whole. If I am ignorant by your standards for calling it is a see it, I don't give a damn.

This is one of the most hateful posts I've seen so far on here. Disgusting.

[jlb524]

baller7345 wrote...

Assuming that the need for reproduction doesn't force a M/F relationship the species would die out.  This is where they are getting the genetic disorder part from.  From an evolutionary standpoint being gay is counter intuitive.  I believe that is the basis of their arguement.

M/F sex is needed for reproduction, and the actual sex act isn't even needed anymore.  M/F romantic relationships are not needed to make babies.

If a lesbian and her partner wants a child and one of them 'takes one for the team' to get pregnant, that hardly makes her straight or in a straight relationship.

[Fiery Phoenix]

This thread is going absolutely nowhere.

[Temper_Graniteskul]

baller7345 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

LiquidGrape wrote...

Interesting factoid: the male G-spot (i.e the prostate gland) can only be reached by means of anal stimulation.
- No wonder it's called "gay". Imagine how much fun these people must have!

I guess Nature must have intended gay sex since that exists.

Don't tell them that...this will ruin their paper-thin argument. 

I don't think you are seeing their point, althtough they aren't wording as well as it could.  I have nothing against anyone who is gay and everyone has a right to do what they want but think of it like this, if everyone in the world was gay what would happen.

Assuming that the need for reproduction doesn't force a M/F relationship the species would die out.  This is where they are getting the genetic disorder part from.  From an evolutionary standpoint being gay is counter intuitive.  I believe that is the basis of their arguement.

It's kind of unfortunate that it ignores the complexity of biology, though, as well as ignoring the many gay men and women who've had straight sex for reproductive purposes.

Also: http://www.springerl...104277w82137x4/ (Possible link between female fecundity and male homosexuality.)

[Ryzaki]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

This thread is going absolutely nowhere.

That's half the fun!

[jlb524]

LiquidGrape wrote...

ReconTeam wrote...

Genetically treating it would be best for the individual and humanity as a whole.

Homogenization; solving humanity's problems since 1927!

[Lamiea]

jlb524 wrote...
M/F sex is needed for reproduction...

You're ignoring artificial insemination.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Because genetically "curing" homosexuality as you would theoretically with any number of other mental or physical conditions would make everybody look exactly the same, and think the same...

[casedawgz]

catabuca wrote...

ReconTeam wrote...

catabuca wrote...
Who gets to decide if homosexuality should be 'cured'? Straight people? Ever thought homosexuals quite like being who they are? There is nothing to 'cure' here, because there is no disease. To argue otherwise merely shows up your ignorance.

When you put it that way perhaps us "ignorant" straight people should get to decide. It doesn't benefit anybody else, it leads to all sorts of confrontation, at least half the world agrees that it is is immoral and wrong, it is a less than healthy practice, and if they are genetically treated they certainly won't miss being gay. What sort of parent would want their child to live as such? Not a very good one in my opinion.

Genetically treating it would be best for the individual and humanity as a whole. If I am ignorant by your standards for calling it is a see it, I don't give a damn.

This is one of the most hateful posts I've seen so far on here. Disgusting.

Seriously. My stance on the same sex romance issues is basically that it's out of our hands and is Bioware's call. This doesn't mean I think putting it in there would negatively affect the game's quality; quite the contrary, it would create more choice, which is what the game is all about. This guy is just venemous and hateful. Makes me sad that people still think like this in 2010.

[Inquisitor Recon]

catabuca wrote...
This is one of the most hateful posts I've seen so far on here. Disgusting.

Hateful how? I am not advocating killing you off or forcing you to undergo such a treatment as an adult. You can do whatever the hell you want if you keep it behind closed doors as far as I am a concerned.

[Onyx Jaguar]

ReconTeam certainly can inspire reactions when he posts

[jlb524]

Lamiea wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
M/F sex is needed for reproduction...

You're ignoring artificial insemination.

I thought I took care of that when I said 'and that's not even needed anymore'?

Yeah, really what it comes down to is two cells hooking up.

[illerianna]

slimgrin wrote...

At one point, there was a worthwhile discussion here.

This is the internet.

Also: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Irrelevant, but my god, it's true.

[baller7345]

Ryzaki wrote...

baller7345 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

LiquidGrape wrote...

Interesting factoid: the male G-spot (i.e the prostate gland) can only be reached by means of anal stimulation.
- No wonder it's called "gay". Imagine how much fun these people must have!

I guess Nature must have intended gay sex since that exists.

Don't tell them that...this will ruin their paper-thin argument. 

I don't think you are seeing their point, althtough they aren't wording as well as it could.  I have nothing against anyone who is gay and everyone has a right to do what they want but think of it like this, if everyone in the world was gay what would happen.

Assuming that the need for reproduction doesn't force a M/F relationship the species would die out.  This is where they are getting the genetic disorder part from.  From an evolutionary standpoint being gay is counter intuitive.  I believe that is the basis of their arguement.

And if everyone else was straight and reproducing we'd have ridculous overpopulation issues.

That's why for the most part its a mix. You need to balance the scales. Too much on any side and everything collapses.

Except that biology worked for millions of years without balance.  Each envirnoment has a carrying capacity that controls the max population that any one species can have.  When a species goes over this capacity the species dies off because of starvation or some other cause due to a lack of resources.  Humans may have pushed our carrying capacity into the billions maybe even futhur due to technology but if we ever had a overpopulation problem that truly got out of hand then we would die out because of a lack of resources and the population would be stabilized.

On a previous note brought up I don't believe that they would cure being gay.  Chaning the levels of hormones that a person is subjected to while in the womb just wouldn't be ethical or safe.  As for the arguement that it is a genetic disorder I don't necessarily believe that since I believe the deciding factors in whether or not someone is gay or not lies in the varying levels of testorone that one is exposed to.

[Lamiea]

jlb524 wrote...
I thought I took care of that when I said 'and that's not even needed anymore'?

Ahhhh... Sorry, I misread your posting.

[Onyx Jaguar]

jlb524 wrote...

Lamiea wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
M/F sex is needed for reproduction...

You're ignoring artificial insemination.

I thought I took care of that when I said 'and that's not even needed anymore'?

Yeah, really what it comes down to is two cells hooking up.

Like I said in a similar thread.  With rampant Genetic Modification sexual orientation is unecessary to maintain population and when/if such a trend exists it would be counterproductive to reproduce the "anologue" way.  

Homosexuality/Heterosexuality/Both would not be something that would be a priority in regards to this science as it most likely would look at traits that would be detrimental to ones health/lifespan

[Siansonea]

Yes, but that discussion has fled. Let us lament its passing. Now we have increasingly outrageous statements meant only to illustrate that in this age, there are individuals who still cling to antiquated, yet dangerous ideas. Humanity, you disappoint me sometimes.

[catabuca]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...



Like I said in a similar thread.  With rampant Genetic Modification sexual orientation is unecessary to maintain population and when/if such a trend exists it would be counterproductive to reproduce the "anologue" way.  

Homosexuality/Heterosexuality/Both would not be something that would be a priority in regards to this science as it most likely would look at traits that would be detrimental to ones health/lifespan

And sex can get on with being just about pleasure - which would be better all round

[jlb524]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Like I said in a similar thread.  With rampant Genetic Modification sexual orientation is unecessary to maintain population and when/if such a trend exists it would be counterproductive to reproduce the "anologue" way.  

Homosexuality/Heterosexuality/Both would not be something that would be a priority in regards to this science as it most likely would look at traits that would be detrimental to ones health/lifespan

Right, look at Miranda.  I'm still not 100% sure how she came about.

Grunt too!

[catabuca]

Siansonea II wrote...

Yes, but that discussion has fled. Let us lament its passing. Now we have increasingly outrageous statements meant only to illustrate that in this age, there are individuals who still cling to antiquated, yet dangerous ideas. Humanity, you disappoint me sometimes.

The poster is but one person. We are legion