The Transformers Archive Skip to main content / Also skip section headers

[The Transformers Archive - an international fan site]
Please feel free to log in or register.

 
  • transformers toys
  • transformers comics
  • transformers cartoon
  • transformers live-action movies
  • transformers fandom
  • transformers forum

Go Back   TFARCHIVE > COMMUNITY > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-03-15, 06:29 PM   #1
another tf fan
I'm your freak-a-zoid
 
another tf fan's Avatar
 
USA
Default Gay baby? Reverend Mohler has your Answer

The Reverend Albert Mohler has posed a question for you. If you knew your baby was going to be gay, before it was born ( through genetic testing, i guess) would you commit to hormonal treatment to make it heterosexual.

tThis is of course a hypothetical question, but it is perplexing. It would seem an admission by a member of the christian community that homosexuality is a born trait, yet raises the question of whether that trait is a defect or not.

If it wasn't homosexuality but say cystic fibrosis and there was an in utero treatment would you attempt treatment in order to give your baby a better life. I imagine most would. Arguments by the gay community have included that they were born gay because why would anyone choose to live a life that is subject to unfair treatment and discrimination. So would you subject your baby to a harder life or try to make it easier by making them heterosexual.

I personally don't know what is best. I could see that an argument could be made that homosexuality is a trait, like blue eyes for example, that is neither bad nor good. It is not being gay that is making it hard on the person, but the way society acts that makes it hard, so society should change. Yet homosexuality provides no biological function and so I can see an argument that it is a genetic defect.

I don't want to get blasted for being a homophobe here, cause I have no problem with what ever people want to do in bed with each other. Makes no difference to me, but this is an interesting conundrum that I would love to see debated.
 

Come on and wind me up.
another tf fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 06:53 PM   #2
Denyer
Shooty Dog Thing
 
Denyer's Avatar
 
UK
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
why would anyone choose to live a life that is subject to unfair treatment and discrimination
Because there's an alternative: kill the bigots slowly and painfully. The same with people who have a problem with others of mixed race heritage.

Honestly, most of the rest of the Western world seems able to handle democracy and civil rights better than the US in this area.

Only China, for example, promotes abortion purely on grounds such as gender.
 
Denyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 07:00 PM   #3
another tf fan
I'm your freak-a-zoid
 
another tf fan's Avatar
 
USA
Default

thanks for the outta context quote denyer.
 

Come on and wind me up.
another tf fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 07:06 PM   #4
Denyer
Shooty Dog Thing
 
Denyer's Avatar
 
UK
Default

How is that out of context?
 
Denyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 07:13 PM   #5
another tf fan
I'm your freak-a-zoid
 
another tf fan's Avatar
 
USA
Default

it makes it seem like i am asking why anyone would do that.
 

Come on and wind me up.
another tf fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 07:20 PM   #6
Hound
Married to Sadie
 
Hound's Avatar
 
Henshin!
Default

This seems akin to someone asking, "Would you change the pgiment of your baby's skin because a certain shade is subject to unfair treatment and discrimination?"

Basically it's like saying, "Why would you let your child be different in any way knowing that there are ignorant bigots out there that will treat him/her unfairly and dicriminate against her/him?"

The problem is not that the baby is gay or black or white or any other race or female or male or whatever. The problem is the ignorant bigots out there that treat people unfairly and dicriminate.

Better to eliminate the bigots...

@another tf fan: You're assuming Denyer's attacking you when that's not his intent. At least I don't think it is.
 
Hound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 07:28 PM   #7
slartibartfast
what's in the box ?
 
slartibartfast's Avatar
 
paris.
Default

it is funny how homosexuality has been so persectuted by the church ( yea, yea... and blah, blahs' sister, and blahs' second cousin) that it's become sacred... anyhow...

Quote:
Originally proposed by reverend Albert Mohler
If you knew your baby was going to be gay, before it was born ( through genetic testing, i guess) would you commit to hormonal treatment to make it heterosexual.
No thanks.

Personally, I would love to live to see the day when sex isn't taboo. Instead of doing flips and twists to fit people into narrow-minded molds, we could actually have a society made up of people instead of numbers.



edit : anyway, doesn't the church have a splinter group along the lines of "homosexuality is gods' answer to planetary overcrowding" ?[/flame the pope]
 

Last edited by slartibartfast; 2007-03-15 at 07:32 PM.
slartibartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 08:53 PM   #8
Denyer
Shooty Dog Thing
 
Denyer's Avatar
 
UK
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Hound
Basically it's like saying,
Not so much "like" -- it is saying, and is acknowledged in the top post.

Onto a comparison made...

Cystic fibrosis is a painful and debilitating genetic condition that even with benefit of modern science reduces life expectancy to around 30. It severely affects quality of life through no fault of the person with it.

Having a preference for the same sex... affects quality of life due to ignorants, including a large concentration who think that an invisible being has a plan for their life and a keen interest in who they have sex with.

If anyone's actually considering those equivalent, I probably am attacking them.

Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
homosexuality provides no biological function
Which explains why same-sex and non-reproductive sex play occur in other species as well as humans, presumably. (Source: the Daily Mail, one of the most conservative newspapers in the UK.)

Sex and attraction perform the function of socialisation in mammals (and in various non-mammalian species) as well as reproduction.

Added to which, over-population is a huge global problem, roughly twenty-eight people born every second whilst ten die. Most countries struggle to accommodate the consumption of resources that accompanies that. The US is no different in that respect; look at statistics for how many lack health insurance.

As a species, we don't "need" more people reproducing. Breeding ourselves into shortages is not success. The "best" situation that can be hoped for is population redistribution or reliable networking -- which will gradually lower the quality of living for a few and greatly improve it for most. It's already happening with tech and phone service jobs disappearing abroad, leaving more unskilled retailing positions at rates of pay closer to the breadline the only option for many people -- lower quality of life.
 
Denyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 10:27 PM   #9
another tf fan
I'm your freak-a-zoid
 
another tf fan's Avatar
 
USA
Default

Denyer you'll find I only agree with you about over-population. Hell I encourage abortion for most of the white trash I meet around here. I am a heartless prick, I know. The way I see it human life is a byproduct of earth conditions, not some holy beautiful way to honor a creator. I have no delusions of an afterlife where we will pay for our sinful ways, you and I are going to the exact same place as Hitler, No where.

Seems to me, you think I started this thread as some way to prove a pro or con arguement about gays. Ignoring the whole part where I said what people do sexually is of no concern to me. You are right that same sex or opposite sex play for pleasure serves little or no biological purpose. Neither does the pancreas, so what. I just wanted to hear the debates on either side.

I shoulda known that asking the question was the same as saying I hate homosexuals, even though I clearly stated in my original post that I don't care what people do.

There is no god judging us, Rev Mohler. In my opinion the reverand is wrong and his arguement is based in fear and maybe latent homosexuality.

... and if I am reading more into what you are saying, Denyer, and you aren't assuming the worst about me, then I'm sorry I'n advance, maybe I read you wrong.
 

Come on and wind me up.

Last edited by another tf fan; 2007-03-15 at 10:32 PM.
another tf fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 11:11 PM   #10
tahukanuva
Human After All
 
tahukanuva's Avatar
 
Tennessee, US
Lightbulb

Honestly, I don't see why so many Christians have such a huge problem with homosexuality. I'm perfectly capable of both: A) being a Christian, and B) not being a homophobic bigot. I don't care one way or the other about other peoples' sexual preferences, and don't automatically assume that because a person doesn't want to **** the same people I do, that they're "damned to Hell." Especially when there's pricks like Phelps who are much more deserving of such a punishment.
 
tahukanuva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 11:22 PM   #11
another tf fan
I'm your freak-a-zoid
 
another tf fan's Avatar
 
USA
Default

awwe the reverend phelps, giving christ a bad name since 1995
 

Come on and wind me up.
another tf fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 11:24 PM   #12
slartibartfast
what's in the box ?
 
slartibartfast's Avatar
 
paris.
Thumbs up

amen brother
 

Last edited by slartibartfast; 2007-03-17 at 02:23 AM.
slartibartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 11:46 PM   #13
Denyer
Shooty Dog Thing
 
Denyer's Avatar
 
UK
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
if I am reading more into what you are saying, Denyer, and you aren't assuming the worst about me, then I'm sorry I'n advance, maybe I read you wrong.
Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
If it wasn't homosexuality but say cystic fibrosis and there was an in utero treatment would you attempt treatment in order to give your baby a better life.
You could pick better analogies.

Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
You are right that same sex or opposite sex play for pleasure serves little or no biological purpose.
It does serve purpose -- socialisation isn't inconsequential in natural selection.

Statistically, women prefer some traits that are stereotypically feminine in long-term partners. (Biological imperative: they're less likely to kill their own young, better providers, etc. In fact the correlation is bit stronger than this -- studies tend to suggest animals have stronger attraction to others with similar genes to them, even if those genes are recessive and don't manifest in their own generation or sex. So a female bird with genetic code for long tail feathers, even if that doesn't express in female birds, will have some preference for birds with long tail feathers. This is likely to be kept in equilibrium by birds having tail feathers that are "too long" finding it harder to fly and to avoid predators.)

Various traits that are stereotypically masculine tend to be preferred for quick shags, and it seems credible we're breeding away from, say, men being very hairy because (amongst many other factors) reproduction is less certain now due to people actively aiming to prevent it. The quick shag relationships reproduce sometimes, but more people reproduce approximately when they choose to with long-term partners.

Given a society in which people can follow instincts to have sex without any prospect of unwanted reproduction or disease, there'd be a strong chance the traditional "quick shag" pool will decrease faster.

I doubt hormonally messing around with embryos would achieve anything other than bring to light a couple of decades later solid reasons for not meddling that closely with a gestation "system" that's survived with few changes for a very long time (at least, not meddling if you want the embryo to survive.) I suspect the truth is that the human brain isn't that fussy -- anything it can form associative connections with can stir sexual arousal, whether it's nude photos, shoes, videos of mice being eaten by snakes, etc. Genetics are predispositions to behaviour, and environment never entirely divorced from genetics. There's a balance of sorts.

Also, genes aren't the magic on-off things biology textbooks tend to portray them as; it's possible to look at an embryo and say "that has an XX% chance of that well-identified genetic factor being expressed" but hoping that a flood of testosterone supplements, for example, will have a specific effect is dicing with someone's health years down the line (assuming a someone develops from that embryo.) There's too much complex interlinking in the process of developmental gene expression to risk switching bits just to see what happens. If you "cull" a gene for blue eyes, for example, without switching some other genes you don't at that time know are important, you may breed in a higher chance of myopia, or the optic nerve growing backwards, etc.

So, it's more feasible to look at factors present and abort on the basis of those factors than it is to try to rewrite the genetic code by modifying the environment. Fortunately, religious nutjobs tend to want eugenic effects without widespread abortion, and the ethics of adding chemical compounds directly to human embryos (where those embryos will then be brought to term) other than within the spectrum of a 'normal' diet are likely to pose some barrier to experimentation in this area.
 
Denyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-15, 11:57 PM   #14
another tf fan
I'm your freak-a-zoid
 
another tf fan's Avatar
 
USA
Default

because of recessive genes eugenics proves not to work. although there still are many who are better off not breeding.
 

Come on and wind me up.
another tf fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-16, 01:19 AM   #15
tahukanuva
Human After All
 
tahukanuva's Avatar
 
Tennessee, US
Talking

Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
there still are many who are better off not breeding.
Like Phelps.
 
tahukanuva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-16, 01:47 AM   #16
Denyer
Shooty Dog Thing
 
Denyer's Avatar
 
UK
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by another tf fan
because of recessive genes eugenics proves not to work.
Depends what you're breeding for. Blue eyes and blonde hair is a very awkward combination to try to obtain consistently in any given population, anyway.
 
Denyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-16, 01:50 AM   #17
slartibartfast
what's in the box ?
 
slartibartfast's Avatar
 
paris.
Default

There's a lot to be said in favour of embryo-modification though. Just because we seem to have no clue on what we should be doing doesn't mean that it doesn't have a tremendous potential for good. We can all imagine mad max scenarios where everyone looks like danny devito but I'm sure there are plenty of practical applications that aren't quite as radical as changing pathological traits... I'm sure I'll think of one in a minute...


... rhaa ... "submit reply"
 
slartibartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-16, 02:23 AM   #18
Denyer
Shooty Dog Thing
 
Denyer's Avatar
 
UK
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by slartibartfast
Just because we seem to have no clue on what we should be doing doesn't mean that it doesn't have a tremendous potential for good.
I look forward to meeting your sclerotic sentient jelly kids one day, and I'm sure they'll try to shake my hand with whatever appendages they have.
 
Denyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-16, 02:33 AM   #19
tahukanuva
Human After All
 
tahukanuva's Avatar
 
Tennessee, US
Talking

Quote:
Originally posted by Denyer
I look forward to meeting your sclerotic sentient jelly kids one day, and I'm sure they'll try to shake my hand with whatever appendages they have.
Best. Quote. Ever.

Errr, I mean, something contributive to the conversation.
 
tahukanuva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-16, 03:00 AM   #20
slartibartfast
what's in the box ?
 
slartibartfast's Avatar
 
paris.
Default

You'd better believe it baby ! They'll have telepathic powers and four telescopic arms and be able to breathe underwater and freakin' mad sh*t !

"these are my kids, shiva and vishnu"



edit : "cthulhu is due in another 5 weeks."
 

Last edited by slartibartfast; 2007-03-16 at 03:02 AM.
slartibartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
 
 
[the-hub.co.uk]
[transfans.co.uk]
[oneshallstand]
[unicron.com]
[counter-x.net]
[ntfa.net]
[allspark.com]
[transformertoys.co.uk]
[tfu.info]
[botchthecrab.com]
[obscure_tf]
[tfradio.net]
 

[TFArchive button]
Link graphics...

BOOKMARK US
Or in FF, hit Ctrl+D.