Study on gay marriage views retracted after allegations of fake data

[*bfine32*]

(05-26-2015, 08:45 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Furthermore, the majority of people who oppose homosexuality also oppose abortion mainly for religious reasons.  So what would be the lesser sin, aborting a fetus or raising a child you know will be homosexual?

To answer the question posed to me. The "lesser sin" would be to raise the child "matter of fact; I wouldn't consider raising a homosexual child to be a sin at all.

Unfortunately, not everyone in the world have the same values as me.

So would you be OK if a woman wanted to abort a child because tests proved it will be born gay, just because she wanted to spare it a hard life?


I see a whole lot of perimeters coming on.

[BmorePat87]

We're now discussing eugenics?

Interesting.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-26-2015, 09:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: To answer the question posed to me. The "lesser sin" would be to raise the child "matter of fact; I wouldn't consider raising a homosexual child to be a sin at all.

Unfortunately, not everyone in the world have the same values as me.

So would you be OK if a woman wanted to abort a child because tests proved it will be born gay, just because she wanted to spare it a hard life?


I see a whole lot of perimeters coming on.

Before I answer your question I will state that I disagree with your premise.  Prenatal testing focuses on disease, e.g. birth defects, chromosomal abnormalities, genetic disorders.  Homosexuality isn't any of those therefore I don't believe the medical community will ever offer such a test.  Preconception genetic testing is also available to determine the risk for genetic disease within a couple.  Theoretically, a couple could be advised of their risk of conceiving a homosexual child and if the risk was too great for them they could act on that information by not conceiving.  Or they might choose to conceive knowing the risk.

To answer your question, not everyone in the world has the same values as me. Therefore, in your scenario I think the choice whether to undergo an abortion rests with the person or couple actually faced with making that decision. I don't believe it is my choice.  I believe it is their choice based upon their values, beliefs, and morals.  Not my values, beliefs, and morals.

If my wife and I conceived and prenatal testing revealed Tay-Sachs disease I would be in favor of terminating the pregnancy.  There are plenty of people who wouldn't be okay with that decision.  But, I don't think I should be ruled by someone else's religious beliefs.  That would be the Christian version of sharia law.

Does that answer your question?

God commanded Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil therefore they could not know the difference between right and wrong.  God knew they would eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil before He even told them not to eat from it.  Before he even created the tree.  Before creation itself.  So why was He so mad when they did exactly what he knew they would do before they did it even though they didn't know the difference between right and wrong?  And because God has held a 6,000 year old grudge ever since he kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Evil everybody's life has been hard, not just a lone child.  Because that is the way He wants it.

[GMDino]

(05-27-2015, 01:11 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: God commanded Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil therefore they could not know the difference between right and wrong.  God knew they would eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil before He even told them not to eat from it.  Before he even created the tree.  Before creation itself.  So why was He so mad when they did exactly what he knew they would do before they did it even though they didn't know the difference between right and wrong?  And because God has held a 6,000 year old grudge ever since he kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Evil everybody's life has been hard, not just a lone child.  Because that is the way He wants it.

Because its a story to explain why bad things happen in the world and not real?

[SteelCitySouth]

(05-26-2015, 05:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No it doesn't threaten the existence of our species; neither do many other Brain Disorders suffered by countless people. Luckily there are more than enough functional folks to keep the species moving.

Do you think that everyone that is gay wants to be gay? if you answer yes then stop here. If you answer no, then do you think it would be worthwhile to look for treatment if it were found to be a process in the brain, instead of a "gene" we are born with?

It is almost too ironic; I'm actually advocating that homosexuality may not be a choice and it's meeting with great resistance by the ones that assert it is not.

The intellectually honest answer to your first question is that i don't know. i have never met a gay person that has expressed a desire not to be gay; however, that does not mean that it does not happen.

What other brain disorders are there that don't have their origins in genetics, and expressed genes? Baring obvious brain injuries.

[BmorePat87]

(05-27-2015, 08:50 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: The intellectually honest answer to your first question is that i don't know.  i have never met a gay person that has expressed a desire not to be gay; however, that does not mean that it does not happen.

What other brain disorders are there that don't have their origins on genetics, and expressed genes?  Baring obvious brain injuries.

You would also have to assume that the desire to be straight comes from society's response to the idea of being gay. It's like when they ask black children to pick the "good" or "pretty" doll between a black and white doll and they pick the white one. Society tells them that one is better than the other.

[fredtoast]

(05-26-2015, 07:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So you are saying if we could find a way to make folks happier, we shouldn't?

If scientists find a way for me to be rich; I'd be all for it.

I wish I could be gay.

Could you imagine how easy it would be to live with your best male friend instead of having to put up with the craziness of women?

When you take away the sexual attraction almost every guy I know would rather marry another guy than a woman.

[GMDino]

(05-27-2015, 11:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I wish I could be gay.  

Could you imagine how easy it would be to live with your best male friend instead of having to put up with the craziness of women?

When you take away the sexual attraction almost every guy I know would rather marry another guy than a woman.

Don't let them fool you. My cousin is quite the drama queen! He's got be as hard to live with as any woman!

[Belsnickel]

(05-27-2015, 11:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I wish I could be gay.  

Could you imagine how easy it would be to live with your best male friend instead of having to put up with the craziness of women?

When you take away the sexual attraction almost every guy I know would rather marry another guy than a woman.

(05-27-2015, 11:54 AM)GMDino Wrote: Don't let them fool you.  My cousin is quite the drama queen! He's got be as hard to live with as any woman!  

Someone in another department here that I deal with a lot is always complaining about how much he hates gay men and how hard that makes it for him to be in the dating scene. He hates the drama and cattiness that he experiences. A former supervisor of mine felt the same way. I'm certain both of my colleagues in my department that are gay are also in that boat given their personalities. Of course, the one has a husband who I'm sure can bring the drama in. It's quite the odd couple pairing.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-26-2015, 08:45 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Triple screening and genetic amniocentesis are currently available to test for chromosomal abnormalities like Down Syndrome and birth defects like neural tube defects.  Parents can be faced with the difficult decision about whether to continue the pregnancy.  What is the liberal point of view on that?

Amniocentesis is not without risk and can result in miscarriage.  It is only performed in mothers with a high risk of birth defects, genetic abnormalities, or when the results my impact the management of the pregnancy.  Sexual orientation is none of those things.  Testing for sexual orientation would be like testing for your baby's eye color.  The risks would out weigh the benefits and I highly doubt such a test would be offered.

Furthermore, the majority of people who oppose homosexuality also oppose abortion mainly for religious reasons.  So what would be the lesser sin, aborting a fetus or raising a child you know will be homosexual?

Actually if they can prove it by DNA testing, then their would become a test. It might be very expensive (because you know someone's gotta make money off of it), and there would be a market for it.

backing up though, are you saying that they are "born that way" or not?

I'm not religious, and I oppose abortions as well.
Scientifically speaking Life is life.
Call it an embryo, blob of cells or whatever you like (and try to dehumanize it as much as you can).
It's part of the life cycle of a human and you are still killing a human being when you abort.

Now before you go off on the deep end. I'm ok with abortions if you were raped, or there is a good chance of either the mother or the child (or both) dying from birth complications, I would even concede birth defects.

[fredtoast]

(05-28-2015, 07:14 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not religious, and I oppose abortions as well.
Scientifically speaking Life is life.
Call it an embryo, blob of cells or whatever you like (and try to dehumanize it as much as you can).
It's part of the life cycle of a human and you are still killing a human being when you abort.

An embryo is not a person.

It is not a human being by any definition.

Just like an acorn is not an oak tree.  They are two VERY different things.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2015, 07:14 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not religious, and I oppose abortions as well.
Scientifically speaking Life is life.
Call it an embryo, blob of cells or whatever you like (and try to dehumanize it as much as you can).
It's part of the life cycle of a human and you are still killing a human being when you abort.

Now before you go off on the deep end. I'm ok with abortions if you were raped, or there is a good chance of either the mother or the child (or both) dying from birth complications, I would even concede birth defects.

We agree on the abortion issue.  Although I am not at all at ease with using it due to birth defects.  I suppose it depends on the severity of the defect.  But I have always maintained that the choice to abort is a deeply personal and troubling one for a woman to make with or without a husband or boyfriend involved also.  Which is why I fall on the side of opposing it...but understand why it is legal and needs to be available in the cleanest, healthiest way possible.

I do take issue with your definition of "life" though.  Using that a tumor is also "life".  But I agree otherwise.

[*bfine32*]

(05-27-2015, 11:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I wish I could be gay.  

I see your avatar. Don't play like you're not.