A cure for homosexuality

[Insult to Rocks]

If it were 20 years ago and the choice was offered (and I was an adult, ect. It's a hypothetical dammit) I would make my child straight without a blink of an eye.

Today I wouldn't do it. I've seen society become more and more tolerate and accepting in just the last few years than I could've even imagined as a closeted teenager. So yeah, I wouldn't change a child's orientation today.

That being said what if a parent wanted to make their child gay?

That would be just as wrong. Changing anyone's sexuality for them at all is morally wrong, and is essentially mind control. And honestly, with all the medical problems we humans face, gender orientation vaccines seem fairly useless and arbitrary.

[The Skeletal Atheist]

Of course I didn't mean to imply it's morally right. I'm just wondering how those who'd make their kid straight out of bigotry would react if someone made their kid gay.

[Plu]

Society is the problem, not them.

Yes Shir, that is indeed the problem, now which is the most easily fixed?

Making your kid straight isn't fixing anything, it's coddling your kid and avoiding the problem. I don't really see a big difference between this and parents who don't let their kid play outside because he might get hurt. Society will still find a way to fuck your kid over, and trying to coddle and protect them from everything in the end will only make them more vulnerable most of the time. Life sucks, might as well prepare them for it.

And nothing has ever been "fixed" by letting the majority get away with their bigotry. All that does is validate them that if they bully people enough, eventually they will give up, roll over, and let themselves be fucked with.

[aitm]

Society is the problem, not them.

Yes Shir, that is indeed the problem, now which is the most easily fixed?

I just don't see being treated differently by society as something being wrong with you, so there is nothing there to fix.

Bigotry won't change if everyone else changes to accommodate bigotry.

Agree with that, but I would not be so willing to bet that society would change that much. If the issue was mine I would make the change because I can control that. You, unlike me, may actually have that choice in the near future, then you can examine it first hand.

[aitm]

[Making your kid straight isn't fixing anything, it's coddling your kid and avoiding the problem. .

ah, maybe you missed that part of it being "fixed" during pregnancy. That kinda would eliminate the whole coddling thingy..dontcha think?

[Johan]

Agree with that, but I would not be so willing to bet that society would change that much.

I think you'd be surprised. When I was a teen ager some 30 years ago now, I had several classmates who were gay. But none were open about it because they would not have been accepted by many in the class.

Go into that same school today and ask the students if they know of any openly gay classmates and they would likely tell you they do. Ask most of those students if having openly gay classmates bothers them and most would likely tell you they couldn't care less.

Far more kids today just don't give a fuck if someone is gay than would have been the case just 30 years ago. Those kids are going to grow up and have their own kids who also won't give a fuck if someone is gay. I believe we have reached the point where just about anyone who is currently middle aged or younger will  very likely live to see the day when those who choose to be openly bigoted toward gay people end up being far more ostracized by society as a whole than openly gay people.

[Plu]

[Making your kid straight isn't fixing anything, it's coddling your kid and avoiding the problem. .

ah, maybe you missed that part of it being "fixed" during pregnancy. That kinda would eliminate the whole coddling thingy..dontcha think?

Nah, I see it as the same thing. You're protecting your child from life and society by trying to keep him away from the shitty bits. But in the end life and society will still be shitty and he'll just bump into something else instead and with less experience.

[aitm]

Nah, I see it as the same thing. You're protecting your child from life and society by trying to keep him away from the shitty bits. But in the end life and society will still be shitty and he'll just bump into something else instead and with less experience.

What are you talking about? How can changing a unborn to a hetero- during pregnancy have anything to do with "less experience"? Do you think any child born hetero today has "less-experience" in lifes shitty bits?  Every human gets to "enjoy" lifes shitty bits, I would choose to eliminate a certainty that would almost guarantee more shitty. Simple. Just like I would correct anything, anything that would draw undo attention to a child and/or make the child more susceptible to ridicule and torment. I think any parent that would could but wouldn't would be a piece of work.

[aitm]

Far more kids today just don't give a fuck if someone is gay than would have been the case just 30 years ago. Those kids are going to grow up and have their own kids who also won't give a fuck if someone is gay.

I agree its getting better. But I still see and read plenty of cases were gay kids are tormented, some to suicide. Dan Savages program is extremely active not because bullying gays is going away, but because its is still going on.

I am pleased that you and others are so optimistic about todays society that you would not change your childs "gayness" if you could during the pregnancy. I however, do not share your optimistic beliefs for at least another 20 years. Until then I would still opt for the procedure and would urge others as well, were such a thing available.

[Plu]

Nah, I see it as the same thing. You're protecting your child from life and society by trying to keep him away from the shitty bits. But in the end life and society will still be shitty and he'll just bump into something else instead and with less experience.

What are you talking about? How can changing a unborn to a hetero- during pregnancy have anything to do with "less experience"? Do you think any child born hetero today has "less-experience" in lifes shitty bits?  Every human gets to "enjoy" lifes shitty bits, I would choose to eliminate a certainty that would almost guarantee more shitty. Simple. Just like I would correct anything, anything that would draw undo attention to a child and/or make the child more susceptible to ridicule and torment. I think any parent that would could but wouldn't would be a piece of work.

Meh. I wouldn't do any of that. I don't want my child to be a clone-copy of all socially acceptable traits. That sounds boring as fuck. Just let the kid be born as is and experience life like that.

Since you're in the mood for correcting child traits to prevent undo attention, how would you feel about being given the option to "correct" your child so they'd be born inclined towards strong feelings of religion as well? Considering they'd likely get more shit for being atheist than being homosexual, if you could choose between "highly rational" and "highly religious", do you really think you'd pick the latter for your kid?

[Johan]

Far more kids today just don't give a fuck if someone is gay than would have been the case just 30 years ago. Those kids are going to grow up and have their own kids who also won't give a fuck if someone is gay.

I agree its getting better. But I still see and read plenty of cases were gay kids are tormented, some to suicide. Dan Savages program is extremely active not because bullying gays is going away, but because its is still going on.

I am pleased that you and others are so optimistic about todays society that you would not change your childs "gayness" if you could during the pregnancy. I however, do not share your optimistic beliefs for at least another 20 years. Until then I would still opt for the procedure and would urge others as well, were such a thing available.

Fair enough. But of course any such hypothetical procedure would carry a risk of unknowable side effects which could take as long as 30 years or more to manifest. So taking this injection guarantees your unborn child will turn out completely hetero. But then 30 years later we find that the rate of muscular dystrophy is 50 times the national average for people who received the no homo treatment before birth. Or perhaps we find that 30 years later, the rate of infertility is 30 times the national average for adults who received the treatment before birth.

Those risks would be unknowable until after the fact. So in light of that, would taking that chance still be the better option to you? I mean I know we're talking hypotheticals here but reality is still reality. And the reality is until a large number of individuals received this treatment, grew up, reproduced, grew old and died, and had their children grow up and reproduce without observable side effects, there would simply be no way to know for sure what the long term side effects could turn out to be.

This is the reason I do not every go through the nudie scanners at airports. I always opt out every time. The magnetometers have been in use since before I was born with no known observable ill effects to those who use them. The nudie scanners have been in use for only a few short years. It is impossible to know what long term effects could occur and I refuse to be the TSA's guinea pig.

[aitm]

Just let the kid be born as is and experience life like that.

well we disagree. I am a lousy parent. I know that kids will get stung by bees and maybe a broken bone in their life, but I am just the kind of guy that will try to stop a bee if  I see it, and will try to keep the kid from getting a broken bone. It's just me, I kinda think it's my role to protect my kid as best as  I can, and sure I know she will get picked on and maybe bullied in her child hood, but damn if I would do my best to stop it. And if the doc said the kid is going to have both sex organs I would opt to have that stopped as well, its just me. I really have no interest in making a childs' life tougher if I have the chance to prevent it.

[Plu]

What about my last question?

Since you're in the mood for correcting child traits to prevent undo attention, how would you feel about being given the option to "correct" your child so they'd be born inclined towards strong feelings of religion as well? Considering they'd likely get more shit for being atheist than being homosexual, if you could choose between "highly rational" and "highly religious", do you really think you'd pick the latter for your kid?

I'm curious now if you see this the same way.

[aitm]

Fair enough. But of course any such hypothetical procedure would carry a risk of unknowable side effects which could take as long as 30 years or more to manifest.

Those risks would be unknowable until after the fact. So in light of that, would taking that chance still be the better option to you?

Now thats a good point, except it was not part of the OP so......er..........I ain't gonn play.  :Hangman:

[aitm]

What about my last question?

Since you're in the mood for correcting child traits to prevent undo attention, how would you feel about being given the option to "correct" your child so they'd be born inclined towards strong feelings of religion as well? Considering they'd likely get more shit for being atheist than being homosexual, if you could choose between "highly rational" and "highly religious", do you really think you'd pick the latter for your kid?

I'm curious now if you see this the same way.

I do not see this as similar at all, and frankly I could actually see a day in which the former could be possible whereas the latter could never be proven to work.