Would you support a cure for homosexuality and transexualism?

[Vegosiux]

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child.

My mother always said, "I have not born my children for myself, I've born them for the world."

I respect her a lot for that. And my heart is wrenching in agony out of sympathy for bigoted parents, it really is. (not really)

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use.

"Cures" are for "diseases" though. The implication would be that if you're taking a cure, there's something "wrong" with you. Like in the third X-Men movie where there's a "cure" for the "mutant disease".

 

[xmbts]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use . However , it's an interesting thought , since homosexuality is apparently not a choice but people are born attracted to men . I think the question the OP was asking was more of a moral question . Kind of like in how in sci-fi movies you can change a determine a childs characteristics such as eye color and hair color .

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child. Whether or not those parents are terrible people is subjective , but if it doesn't negatively affect the child i don't see why i wouldn't support it . Parents that want to have homosexual children can , those that don't want to won't .

Everyone is happy.

Yeah but then you get into the Gattica territory.

Plus manipulating a person so they don't squick you out will always just sound pretty horrifying to me.

 

[YoungMan]

I would get behind it, so long as it was not law and it was the individuals choice so after the child had gone through puberty and could maybe decide for themselves what they would like.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

not a cure, no, it isn't "wrong", by any means.

just on the same note i would support a "straight" vaccine, so someone could be homo/trans if they felt like that might be their path in life. It doesn't harm anyone and it is their concious choice.



but implanting the baby to make sure it ends up straight specifically? hell no, we have enough straight people in this world humping anything that moves and making enough unwanted/accident kids to make entire countries of them, i'm completely open to any of those ideas.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use . However , it's an interesting thought , since homosexuality is apparently not a choice but people are born attracted to men . I think the question the OP was asking was more of a moral question . Kind of like in how in sci-fi movies you can change a determine a childs characteristics such as eye color and hair color .

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child. Whether or not those parents are terrible people is subjective , but if it doesn't negatively affect the child i don't see why i wouldn't support it . Parents that want to have homosexual children can , those that don't want to won't .

Everyone is happy.

no, not everyone is happy, you're literally robbing that child of their choice, that is anything but happy, I'd be steaming pissed if someone tried to make such a decision for me, as sexuality/gender is a huge part of life, whether people like it or not.

 

[Voulan]

Since transgenderism and homosexuality occur even in nature and in all sort of other non-human animal species, I think it's clear that it isn't related to genetics or birth defects. We don't often hear about the crazy antics of animals because documentaries were first made to anthropomorphise Western ideals like the nuclear family model.

So it's clearly a choice. So absolutely not. Not unless there is a demand for it from the people themselves (from the actual person - if parents would use it on their young child or even on the family pet then I'd step my foot down).

 

[DefunctTheory]

As a cure for the already born, no. Seems like that's a can of worms not worth opening, even if a gay individual wanted it.

Now, IFthe hormone theory is correct (From what I've read, it seems like a theory with some pretty comprehensive evidence, though nothing confirmed), I would support a fix for that while it's happening, not after. It is technically a fault, and your not really 'curing' gay at that point. Your merely supporting baseline reproduction.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

no, not everyone is happy, you're literally robbing that child of their choice, that is anything but happy, I'd be steaming pissed if someone tried to make such a decision for me, as sexuality/gender is a huge part of life, whether people like it or not.

American culture is fine with doing stuff like that, they already circumcise kids at birth.

I'm not sure why you are bringing that up? And it isn't just "america", as the tradition didn't start here, and in fact it has been in a steady decline for years now:

plenty more where this is from [http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/22/circumcision-infants-hospitals/2681253/]

so I'm not sure why you are bringing that up, as that's not the point of this thread and I don't think anyone (specifically me) has mentioned it.

 

[krazykidd]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use . However , it's an interesting thought , since homosexuality is apparently not a choice but people are born attracted to men . I think the question the OP was asking was more of a moral question . Kind of like in how in sci-fi movies you can change a determine a childs characteristics such as eye color and hair color .

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child. Whether or not those parents are terrible people is subjective , but if it doesn't negatively affect the child i don't see why i wouldn't support it . Parents that want to have homosexual children can , those that don't want to won't .

Everyone is happy.

no, not everyone is happy, you're literally robbing that child of their choice, that is anything but happy, I'd be steaming pissed if someone tried to make such a decision for me, as sexuality/gender is a huge part of life, whether people like it or not.

But homosexuality ( accordingto studies ) isn't a choice . Therefor no choice is lost .

 

[NearLifeExperience]

Think of all the people that would get peer-pressured or even downright forced into taking that so-called 'cure'. And quite frankly, I don't think it needs 'curing'. It's not a disease! So hell no, I would definitely not support that.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use . However , it's an interesting thought , since homosexuality is apparently not a choice but people are born attracted to men . I think the question the OP was asking was more of a moral question . Kind of like in how in sci-fi movies you can change a determine a childs characteristics such as eye color and hair color .

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child. Whether or not those parents are terrible people is subjective , but if it doesn't negatively affect the child i don't see why i wouldn't support it . Parents that want to have homosexual children can , those that don't want to won't .

Everyone is happy.

no, not everyone is happy, you're literally robbing that child of their choice, that is anything but happy, I'd be steaming pissed if someone tried to make such a decision for me, as sexuality/gender is a huge part of life, whether people like it or not.

But homosexuality ( accordingto studies ) isn't a choice . Therefor no choice is lost .

so at age 6, if your parents changed your skin color to white/latino/etc , you wouldn't mind in the slightest and would roll with it?

your robbing the kid of their identity, for incredibly selfish reasons (if one is to assume that a parent can't stand the fact that their child doesn't like what they want them to sexually)

 

[wakeup]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use . However , it's an interesting thought , since homosexuality is apparently not a choice but people are born attracted to men . I think the question the OP was asking was more of a moral question . Kind of like in how in sci-fi movies you can change a determine a childs characteristics such as eye color and hair color .

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child. Whether or not those parents are terrible people is subjective , but if it doesn't negatively affect the child i don't see why i wouldn't support it . Parents that want to have homosexual children can , those that don't want to won't .

Everyone is happy.

how about the child its forced upon, is he happy. parents have no right to make that choice. also keep in mind that parents are usually the last people to find out if their child is gay (im 18 and my parents don't know). if the decision to turn me straight was forced upon me i would be furious. being gay i find the notion of being cured really offensive, im happy about who i am so i wouldn't support it. if this "cure" did exist people like me who would decide to stay gay would be ridiculed even more than we are now. ps. you don't usually find out that your gay until your a teenager, so turning them straight at that point would have a huge impact on their life and not likely in a good way

 

[mad825]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.

Is paedophilia a disease? Is it a mental illness? I await your response.

If a person thinks that something is a negative, their response is to remove it. I would have no doubt that there would be someone who would support a cure.

 

[shrekfan246]

no, not everyone is happy, you're literally robbing that child of their choice, that is anything but happy, I'd be steaming pissed if someone tried to make such a decision for me, as sexuality/gender is a huge part of life, whether people like it or not.

American culture is fine with doing stuff like that, they already circumcise kids at birth.

That... that's not really an American thing, you know...

OT: Gonna join the people saying that "cure" isn't really the proper term you should be using for this context.

My support would depend on what it actually did. As far as transgenderism goes, if we go full sci-fi on this ***** and assume that it would simply alter them to the gender they would later come to identify as in the first place, then I would probably support it. If it simply "rewrote" their brain, then I can't say I would. For homosexuality... ehhhh... probably not, to be honest, unless it simply caused them to be able to be attracted to any gender, therefore allowing them the choice of whatever they like later in life.

And if they were mandatory, I wouldn't support them regardless of their effects. People deserve to make their own decisions.

[sub]Transgenderism isn't really analogous to homosexuality, especially in this context, which is why I've got different answers for the two.[/sub]

 

[xmbts]

Oh boy.
Homosexualty and transexuality aren't diseases.
Even as a sci-fi scenario, I can't buy it. I think it's horrid.
And no, I wouldn't support it.

No one said it was a disease . I do agree "cure" is not the right word to use . However , it's an interesting thought , since homosexuality is apparently not a choice but people are born attracted to men . I think the question the OP was asking was more of a moral question . Kind of like in how in sci-fi movies you can change a determine a childs characteristics such as eye color and hair color .

OT: I would support it , not because i don't like gay people, but for the parents who wouldn't be able to cope with a homosexual child. Whether or not those parents are terrible people is subjective , but if it doesn't negatively affect the child i don't see why i wouldn't support it . Parents that want to have homosexual children can , those that don't want to won't .

Everyone is happy.

no, not everyone is happy, you're literally robbing that child of their choice, that is anything but happy, I'd be steaming pissed if someone tried to make such a decision for me, as sexuality/gender is a huge part of life, whether people like it or not.

But homosexuality ( accordingto studies ) isn't a choice . Therefor no choice is lost .

By having something that can make you heterosexual you are creating a choice out of it, and that is a choice that nobody ever has any right making for another person.

 

[beez]

I think it's not my choice. As far as I know I do not belong to either group, so I do not have any right to make such grand decisions that affect other people's lives in such way. Even if it were a disease, homosexual, bisexual, transgender people are conscious members of society whose personal lives make no influence over their sanity. As such I would support that this question be decided by the people it affects, for themselves. The only thing I would support in that hypothetical scenario is that they should have a choice. It is only fair.