A Hypothetical:

_

Austicman wrote:

We are talking Hypotheticals:

Whats much more interesting is that a pro-life, anti gay person would know that their child is going to be born gay and not be making a "lifestyle choice" and then give birth to that child because they oppose abortion.

Interesting point. If a "gay gene" is found, wouldn't that blow some people's theory that being gay means someone is making an immoral decision? Shouldn't being gay then cease to be considered wrong?

Drowned Out

saveuplife wrote:

Is it wrong to abort a gay child if a gay gene is found?

we need to find the gene for the religious right...

keeponrockin

scb wrote:

Interesting point. If a "gay gene" is found, wouldn't that blow some people's theory that being gay means someone is making an immoral decision? Shouldn't being gay then cease to be considered wrong?

Shouldn't it already be ceased?

_

keeponrockin wrote:

Shouldn't it already be ceased?

Of course.

But you know what I meant.

saveuplife

QuestionAuthority wrote:

None of my gay friends kids are gay.. and one of my straight friends daughter just came out of the closet.. so that kind of blows your theory.

I'm not denying that straight people have gay children. Or that gays could have a straight child. I'm not saying anything at all about whether one is even born with a gay gene. I don't know if people are even born gay or if it's a choice. That's why the thread is a hypothetical.

But, addressing one of your points.... if one was to believe it's hereditary... your point on "none of my gay friends kids are gay" is kinda off. As you know, gays can't procreate. They need someone else. Hence, maybe that persons hereditary info superceeded.

saveuplife

scb wrote:

Interesting point. If a "gay gene" is found, wouldn't that blow some people's theory that being gay means someone is making an immoral decision? Shouldn't being gay then cease to be considered wrong?

Who considers it wrong? The Catholic Church doesn't. I don't know for sure about other forms of Christianity, but I'm pretty sure they don't consider homosexuality intrinsicly wrong either.

The action (f'ing)... that's where it gets slippery. But, need I remind you, there's a consistency in the Catholic Church. People who have sex outside of wedlock also sin.

_

saveuplife wrote:

I'm not denying that straight people have gay children. Or that gays could have a straight child.

I'm sure I'll be accused of nitpicking, but why are the straights people and the gays are not? This seems disrespectful to me.

saveuplife wrote:

As you know, gays can't procreate. They need someone else.

Gay people can very well procreate. Of course they need someone else, just like straight people need someone else. That other person can be gay or straight (whether or not the first person was gay or straight). Just because the sperm and the egg may or may not come together in the usual fashion doesn't mean they can't procreate.

saveuplife

scb wrote:

I'm sure I'll be accused of nitpicking, but why are the straights people and the gays are not? This seems disrespectful to me..

Are you serious? Come on, man.... that's ridiculous.

scb wrote:

Gay people can very well procreate. Of course they need someone else, just like straight people need someone else. That other person can be gay or straight (whether or not the first person was gay or straight). Just because the sperm and the egg may or may not come together in the usual fashion doesn't mean they can't procreate.

You seriously are nitpicking.... a gay couple can not reproduce. That's what I meant.

urbanhippie

saveuplife wrote:

You seriously are nitpicking.... a gay couple can not reproduce. That's what I meant.

Here's a scenario that I think scb is trying to suggest.
One half of a lesbian couple uses the sperm of a homosexual man to get pregnant (it could happen).
Both parents are gay, if not a couple.

QuestionAuthority

urbanhippie wrote:

Here's a scenario that I think scb is trying to suggest.
One half of a lesbian couple uses the sperm of a homosexual man to get pregnant (it could happen).
Both parents are gay, if not a couple.

This is EXACTLY what occoured with a set of friends. Lets call him "Gary" the gay guy donated the sperm to "Linda" the lesbian and voila a straight baby.. a few years later "Gary" found someone he wanted to share his life with and wanted to have a family and since "Gary" helped "Linda" before ~ she donated her egg and carried the baby to term and voila another straight baby.. neither beautiful kids (nearly adults now) are gay.

urbanhippie

QuestionAuthority wrote:

This is EXACTLY what occoured with a set of friends. Lets call him "Gary" the gay guy donated the sperm to "Linda" the lesbian and voila a straight baby.. a few years later "Gary" found someone he wanted to share his life with and wanted to have a family and since "Gary" helped "Linda" before ~ she donated her egg and carried the baby to term and voila another straight baby.. neither beautiful kids (nearly adults now) are gay.

Thats a lovely story

pjalive21

chiefojibwa wrote:

this thread should be aborted.

i agree..how is this thread not locked?

im against gay anything and i even think this is crossing a line

decides2dream

saveuplife wrote:

I don't know if it will come down to anything at all. I don't even know if there's a gene. That's why this was a hypothetical.

i realize...but you made a pretty definitive statement for IF your hypothetical was true....and THAT is what i was questioning. that's all.

saveuplife

QuestionAuthority wrote:

This is EXACTLY what occoured with a set of friends. Lets call him "Gary" the gay guy donated the sperm to "Linda" the lesbian and voila a straight baby.. a few years later "Gary" found someone he wanted to share his life with and wanted to have a family and since "Gary" helped "Linda" before ~ she donated her egg and carried the baby to term and voila another straight baby.. neither beautiful kids (nearly adults now) are gay.

I don't doubt that that could happen. But, it argues against the gay gene theory, and makes it more likely that it could be a choice.

Regardless, I don't doubt that your story is true. However, I would say that invitro fertilization is relatively new. So, the babies in this case may or may not be gay. I don't think that's too scientific. But, nonetheless interesting.

saveuplife

pjalive21 wrote:

i agree..how is this thread not locked?

im against gay anything and i even think this is crossing a line

Why is this thread crossing a line? Explain.

decides2dream

saveuplife wrote:

I don't doubt that that could happen. But, it argues against the gay gene theory, and makes it more likely that it could be a choice

Regardless, I don't doubt that your story is true. However, I would say that invitro fertilization is relatively new. So, the babies in this case may or may not be gay. I don't think that's too scientific. But, nonetheless interesting.

not really.
it goes back to what i was asking earlier...do you really think it may be simply ONE genetic marker that makes one homosexual? i mean, i personally think it will end up being far more complex than that.....just like so much else about us as people and our preferences.


since gays really only recently started to procreate using outside procedures, etc......the VAST majority of gay people come from cheterosexual couples. granted, since homosexuality was SO ostracized for SO long, there probably were tons of gays pretending to be straight....and also don't forget those who are much more ambiguous in their sexuality...all of which has existed. since humans are not the only species to have same-sex intercourse, i don't doubt it's genetic....but i highly doubt it comes down to just one gene.


besides, genetics from one parent to child do NOT all pass on b/c it is the combination of genetic material from both parents...and even then, even if both parents may have some same trait or gene, it does not guarantee the child will. just not how it works.

Jeremy1012

saveuplife wrote:

Is it wrong to abort a gay child if a gay gene is found?

My opinion, as you well know, is that, pre-third trimester, a woman should be entitled to abort a baby for whatever reason she chooses but frankly, if she chooses to abort a baby for no reason other than they fact it will grow up to be gay, I support the abortion of her as well.

QuestionAuthority

saveuplife wrote:

I don't doubt that that could happen. But, it argues against the gay gene theory, and makes it more likely that it could be a choice.

Regardless, I don't doubt that your story is true. However, I would say that invitro fertilization is relatively new. So, the babies in this case may or may not be gay. I don't think that's too scientific. But, nonetheless interesting.

Let me get this straight.. you think a gay gene.. which btw I KNOW to be true as it certainly is NOT a choice.. or ALL my friends who are homosexual would have CHOOSEN to be straight. You think the gene is only a inherited gene? Meaning you can only "get it" if you have a gay parent. You are so off base it is not even remotely funny.. not to mention the fact that you think in vitro fertilization is "relatively new".. try since the early 80's ~ over 20-25 YEARS ago, that does not scream of new technology to me. The children in question are 17 and 12. The 17 year old boy raised by lesbians loves the ladies and the 12 year old girl raised by two gay guys loves The Jonas Brothers.. say whatever you will about the Jonas Brothers.. but she loves that Nick!

I could care less if you believe my tale of my personal experiences regarding gay parenting.. the fact of reality is that gay couples are choosing to have lots and lots of babies and they are finding ways to do it.. another story of a gay couple who took both of their sperm to pregnate a surrogate and they had twin girls.. so perhaps they each have a baby from each of their sperm or one is the genetic father of both.. who knows.. they have no intention of testing.

decides2dream

QuestionAuthority wrote:

Let me get this straight.. you think a gay gene.. which btw I KNOW to be true as it certainly is NOT a choice.. or ALL my friends who are homosexual would have CHOOSEN to be straight. You think the gene is only a inherited gene? Meaning you can only "get it" if you have a gay parent. You are so off base it is not even remotely funny.. not to mention the fact that you think in vitro fertilization is "relatively new".. try since the early 80's ~ over 20-25 YEARS ago, that does not scream of new technology to me. The children in question are 17 and 12. The 17 year old boy raised by lesbians loves the ladies and the 12 year old girl raised by two gay guys loves The Jonas Brothers.. say whatever you will about the Jonas Brothers.. but she loves that Nick!

I could care less if you believe my tale of my personal experiences regarding gay parenting.. the fact of reality is that gay couples are choosing to have lots and lots of babies and they are finding ways to do it.. another story of a gay couple who took both of their sperm to pregnate a surrogate and they had twin girls.. so perhaps they each have a baby from each of their sperm or one is the genetic father of both.. who knows.. they have no intention of testing.

exactly.


besides the fact, no matter what specific issue you may be discussing...genetics simply do NOT work like that. just b/c both parents are the same for any one thing...whether eye color, hair color, handedness, etc, etc.......does not in any way, shape or form guarantee such will be the case for the child. the individual combination of genes, the utterly UNIQUE genetic make-up of the offspring, the unqique, one-time occurance of that *exact* blend of the parent's genes....is what make him/her who they are. so having 2 straight parents, or 2 gay parents, or any combination...even IF there were a 'gay gene'......would not mean that even if both of them carried such a gene, would their offspring necessarily BE gay, or even carry on the gay gene, etc.

christ...i am no genetics genius by ANY stretch but i have read and studies much in school on just the BASICS....and the basics make it CLEAR...that a parent's sexual orientation, or any specific trait....would never guarantee a child to have that same gene. some genetic factors only run in famiies...may skip generations....get mixed with other, new genetic materials.....at most, you might be able to determine a 'likelihood' at best. sexuality is not a disability or abnormality that would be clear, say like down's syndrome, etc. i do not believe they would ever be able to determine with accuracy that a child will indeed be homosexual, even with discovery of a 'gay gene(s)"......just not how genetics works.

urbanhippie

decides2dream wrote:

besides the fact, no matter what specific issue you may be discussing...genetics simply do NOT work like that. just b/c both parents are the same for any one thing...whether eye color, hair color, handedness, etc, etc.......does not in any way, shape or form guarantee such will be the case for the child. the individual combination of genes, the utterly UNIQUE genetic make-up of the offspring, the unqique, one-time occurance of that *exact* blend of the parent's genes....is what make him/her who they are. so having 2 straight parents, or 2 gay parents, or any combination...even IF there were a 'gay gene'......would not mean that even if both of them carried such a gene, would their offspring necessarily BE gay, or even carry on the gay gene, etc.

I don't mean to correct you d2d, but some things like eye and hair colour and the ability to roll ones tongue are directly determined by the genetic material of the parents. Two blue eyed people cannot have a brown eyed child. Red hair is a recessive gene and has to be carried by the parent etc

christ...i am no genetics genius by ANY stretch but i have read and studies much in school on just the BASICS....and the basics make it CLEAR...that a parent's sexual orientation, or any specific trait....would never guarantee a child to have that same gene. some genetic factors only run in famiies...may skip generations....get mixed with other, new genetic materials.....at most, you might be able to determine a 'likelihood' at best. sexuality is not a disability or abnormality that would be clear, say like down's syndrome, etc. i do not believe they would ever be able to determine with accuracy that a child will indeed be homosexual, even with discovery of a 'gay gene(s)"......just not how genetics works.

However I think you're perfectly right here. I'm comparing it to the discovery of the BRCA breast cancer genes, which may show a pre-disposition to the disease, but because of the multitude of other factors involved, cannot provide a definitive answer about whether the disease will develop.

The very most (if anything at all) that a genetic marker would be likely to show would be a possibility that homosexuality would be considered by this person. And thats a very intangible thing to be worried about for an unborn child.