Homo Fetus Ejection?

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be gay, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

Your hypothetical assumes that babies are "born" gay. It also assumes that "born" gay babies will act on their "gayness." Lastly, it assumes that the "born" gay baby can not be rescued from his or her "gayness."

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be gay, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

I take everything I just said back: This is a real problem in Iran, where there are no homosexuals.

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
This is a serious issue. I'm saddened and dismayed that y'all can't address the issues.

Sorry. I have a hard time taking someone seriously who has an avator with a picture of a KKK member with a sheet over their head wearing sunglasses. It won't happen again I can assure you.


Y'all can count on that!!!

OK, now were where we? Oh yea! Gay fetus's, gay fetus's, gay fetus's.....Nope, drawing a blank here. Sorry. Carry on!!

Originally posted by SmookieP
Yes, if somehow I knew that my child would be born gay, I would abort it.

So being alive and gay is worse than being DEAD? Are you an idiot?

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Your hypothetical assumes that babies are "born" gay. It also assumes that "born" gay babies will act on their "gayness." Lastly, it assumes that the "born" gay baby can not be rescued from his or her "gayness."

It also assumes that there is something wrong with being gay. Could someone please explain to me what is "wrong" with being gay. I'm not religious so there is no point refering to the bible etc.

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be gay, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

Where do you stop?

If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be bigoted, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be a Leonard Cohen fan, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

Originally posted by gaychessplayer
So being alive and gay is worse than being DEAD? Are you an idiot?

I was only being insightful.

As to your question, yes I'm an idiot. Beside that, I know that growing up as a gay person would be terrible in this world. The original question was would you abort a baby in the womb knowing that it would turn out gay..

If I was a woman with that choice, I probably would. Only because I know the heartache that goes with it.

As for my idiocy, would you like to talk and maybe have a game?

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be gay, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

Pretty sharp aren't you!

EDIT: It seems your audience isn't though.

Originally posted by Wheely
Pretty sharp aren't you!

EDIT: It seems your audience isn't though.

I wonder if he'll catch that or not...

Originally posted by SmookieP
I was only being insightful.

As to your question, yes I'm an idiot. Beside that, I know that growing up as a gay person would be terrible in this world. The original question was would you abort a baby in the womb knowing that it would turn out gay..

If I was a woman with that choice, I probably would. Only because I know the heartache that goes with it.

As for my idiocy, would you like to talk and maybe have a game?

While it's probably easier to grow up as a heterosexual in our culture, growing up gay probably isn't "terrible" in most cases, as you said it is.

Originally posted by twiceaknight
It also assumes that there is something wrong with being gay. Could someone please explain to me what is "wrong" with being gay. I'm not religious so there is no point refering to the bible etc.

From the Selfish Gene perspective, it is hard to understand why gayness would not be selected against to some degree.

Originally posted by spruce112358
From the Selfish Gene perspective, it is hard to understand why gayness would not be selected against to some degree.

Cool, somebody answered my question, thanks.

I'm not sure what you mean though. Do you mean that gay people are less likely to reproduce? If so that's true but that's not a problem because there are already too many people hanging around.

Or did you mean something else?

Originally posted by twiceaknight
Cool, somebody answered my question, thanks.

I'm not sure what you mean though. Do you mean that gay people are less likely to reproduce? If so that's true but that's not a problem because there are already too many people hanging around.

Or did you mean something else?

No, that's it.

People have pointed to gay animals to prove that homosexuality occurs naturally. But if gayness results from a mutation in a gene that governs behavior (e.g. it is well known that little boys "play", but during puberty their interest switches to females, so there must be a pathway there), then the condition could exist in any species that has two genders.

Obviously this says nothing about gay practices that arise as a result of deprivation, e.g. ships/prisons, or culture, e.g. Ancient Greece.

From a genetic perspective, not reproducing is always a problem -- not matter how many people are around.

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
If you had an absolutely fool proof method of determining that a fetus will turn out to be gay, wouldn't you be morally obligated to abort it?

Of course not. But if it were a Republican, I might have some soul-searching to do...