but how do gay people themselves help with the existence of the human population. Also, with the example you brought up, what about gay men who only have brothers though?chadachada123 said:
Poll: Thought experiment: What if homosexuality COULD be "cured" medically?
- Thread starter Kolby Jack
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, it'd be their choice. It wouldn't be wrong if they took this medication, nor would it be wrong if they didn't. However, inventing such a medication would cause serious problems socially. There'd be backlash from the homosexual community and you just know that some homophobic moron will go around injecting people/force-feeding people pills. It'll give the homophobes out there another thing to fight homosexuals with.
This would look good on paper if it were by no means mandatory, but it would still cause more problems than it would solve. If there were medications that let someone change their sexuality freely, that'd be better. There'd still be issues, like homophobic parents forcing their child to undergo this orientation-change "just in case they grow up gay". The homophobes would still go around shouting "stop being gay" even louder. It wouldn't be perfect, but it'd be a bit better.
This would look good on paper if it were by no means mandatory, but it would still cause more problems than it would solve. If there were medications that let someone change their sexuality freely, that'd be better. There'd still be issues, like homophobic parents forcing their child to undergo this orientation-change "just in case they grow up gay". The homophobes would still go around shouting "stop being gay" even louder. It wouldn't be perfect, but it'd be a bit better.
I wouldn't support it and i wouldn't be against it. So long as no one's forcing anyone into changing their sexuality i'm all for freedom of the choice to take it.
That's really all i can say about it.
That's really all i can say about it.
True enough, I know it's an irrelevant argument now, when where in a world where we seem to want less people alive, as sad a it seems. But Thats why I said from a scientific standpoint more or less. Personally I don't like homosexuality or rather religiously I can't support it.Thaa said:
but that's for that immoral act itself,just because I can't like the thing a person does doesn't mean I have to dislike the person. One of my closest friends was gay and it doesn't bother me personally, just morally. But same goes for my divorced un-wed pregnant party sister, but I still love her, I just dislike her life style.
It's a hard argument to hate against homosexuality but I know I don't support it.
Gay men promote fertility, etc in women. That absolutely helps with the existence of the human population in large families. Having 7 straight sons and 3 straight daughters might provide 15 children, but 6 straight sons, 1 gay son, and 3 straight daughters would provide 16/17 children.Volf99 said:
This is useless though, because humanity does NOT want a high birth rate or success rate. We have a massive overpopulation problem currently. More children is bad. In that sense, people with children are damaging to humanity, making gay people a welcome addition, eh? This is just semantics, though, and doesn't address the fact that our overpopulation stems from poor people having children outside their means; rich and middle-class people have far too few children currently, blah blah blah.
You're correct in your deduction about gay men with only brothers. Male fertility is unaffected by having gay siblings. Having lesbian siblings also doesn't affect fertility in males or females. I was only showing an evolutionary reason for homosexuality to be present in genetics (etc, I'd really rather not involve the nature/nurture debate into this already-long conversation).
What's more worrying would be the increased probability of a righteous anti-gay crusade forcing these pills down the throats of gays or slipping it into drinks and food.
I agreed with everything you said until the end. I don't think it's a evolutionary advantage. If anything, its like having blue eyes. Not an advantage, but not a disadvantage(in modern society).chadachada123 said:
Actually I'm curious as to how controversial people like Dan Savage would respond to this "situation" if it was real.chadachada123 said:
I wouldn't care where people choose to put thier genitals, just like i don't care right now. But it would be kinda wierd that all those religeous nutbags who go on about homosexuality being a "choice" might be on to something. So i really hope this never comes around for that reason.
But i do actually think something like this would be possible, it does seem likely to me that homosexuality is just a difference in brain chemistry compared to heterosexuals rather than difference in brain structure. But i'm a chemist, not a fucking biologist. And i think if we did get the science of the brain that far in our lifetimes then i want a drug that will make creationists shut the fuck up so we can just put it into the water supply.
But i do actually think something like this would be possible, it does seem likely to me that homosexuality is just a difference in brain chemistry compared to heterosexuals rather than difference in brain structure. But i'm a chemist, not a fucking biologist. And i think if we did get the science of the brain that far in our lifetimes then i want a drug that will make creationists shut the fuck up so we can just put it into the water supply.
I would support it for those who want it. I don't really see why anyone needs it, but I cannot oppose people doing something to make them happy.
As to how the populace would react, I imagine they would react the same way they do to most everything. Some few would stand on one side screaming and waving their fists, some few would stand on the other side doing the exact same thing, and the remainder would sit in the middle hoping in vain not to get caught by the shrapnel.
As to how the populace would react, I imagine they would react the same way they do to most everything. Some few would stand on one side screaming and waving their fists, some few would stand on the other side doing the exact same thing, and the remainder would sit in the middle hoping in vain not to get caught by the shrapnel.
There are always going to be people who are not happy with the way that they are and would give anything to be like everyone else.
While I believe they don't need curing, it's never bad to have options.
Then again, with something like this on the market it seems like it is very open to having people abuse it.
It appears that further delving into the subject is keeping me from answering it.
While I believe they don't need curing, it's never bad to have options.
Then again, with something like this on the market it seems like it is very open to having people abuse it.
It appears that further delving into the subject is keeping me from answering it.
peoples choice i suppose, but i would urge people to not change something like that, anything that is a fundamental part of you should be yours.
of course someone might not consider their sexuality important and might just want to change it so it's easier to find a boyfriend/girlfriend, and since i find it much more repulsive to try to suppress someone else's rights then for someone to change themselves, i wouldn't try to stop anybody.
of course someone might not consider their sexuality important and might just want to change it so it's easier to find a boyfriend/girlfriend, and since i find it much more repulsive to try to suppress someone else's rights then for someone to change themselves, i wouldn't try to stop anybody.
There would be an extreme negative reaction but that is just idiots making a fuss over something that doesn't overly matter.
My first thought was no but then I thought about it and decided it should be their choice. I wonder if they would then make a pill to turn you gay or asexual.
My first thought was no but then I thought about it and decided it should be their choice. I wonder if they would then make a pill to turn you gay or asexual.
Well.
I'm a woman. My ex-boyfriend is gay. We broke up amicably just a week ago, after he'd been struggling with his sexuality for 8 months. He told me as soon as he suspected he might be gay, and I've been offering him emotional support and trying to be there for him as he comes out to his friends and family. Unfortunately, we're still in love with each other. In fact, I'm the only person he's ever loved, or even wanted a relationship with. (He's 31; I was his first relationship, and his first kiss even.)
He remains adamant that if a "cure" is ever found for homosexuality, he will be the first in line for it so that the two of us can be together.
I'm still hesitant on that topic. I would like to be with him, but on the other hand I love him for who he is. If his brain chemistry or whatever was changed around, maybe he'd become an entirely different person. Plus, I might feel like we'd sold our souls or something in order to be together.
But, it would ultimately be his choice.
I'm a woman. My ex-boyfriend is gay. We broke up amicably just a week ago, after he'd been struggling with his sexuality for 8 months. He told me as soon as he suspected he might be gay, and I've been offering him emotional support and trying to be there for him as he comes out to his friends and family. Unfortunately, we're still in love with each other. In fact, I'm the only person he's ever loved, or even wanted a relationship with. (He's 31; I was his first relationship, and his first kiss even.)
He remains adamant that if a "cure" is ever found for homosexuality, he will be the first in line for it so that the two of us can be together.
I'm still hesitant on that topic. I would like to be with him, but on the other hand I love him for who he is. If his brain chemistry or whatever was changed around, maybe he'd become an entirely different person. Plus, I might feel like we'd sold our souls or something in order to be together.
But, it would ultimately be his choice.