Thread: A "fix" for homosexuality

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Like the honor that it takes to admit that you've done something wrong and apologize appropriately when you've insulted another?

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

LOL, Nice try at escaping moral condemnation. Today's political correctness considers offense/insult as morally equivalent to crimes against humanity, which is what acts of homosexuality are.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

The fuck are you babbling about now?

I ... am ... typing ... this ... S-L-O-W-L-Y ... so ... you ... can ... understand: being offended does not mean the other person did something immoral.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Ah, so you're completely without honor.


Not unexpected.

Quite the opposite. Honor guides me.

Originally Posted by noahath

..............Lot was destroyed because Lot, Abraham's nephew, married outside of the Church (The Bible forbids Israelites from marrying outside of the religion), did not encourage circumcision, encouraged the marrying of relatives to maintain racial (or religious) purity (Genesis 24 3-4; 28:1) ... but most serious of all, they did not worship God. ....

Yes, well said regarding the destruction of Lot. Faith is the primary factor. That's a nice summation of Lot's story. It seems that UK's comments are mixed with references to Sodom and Gomorrah, the cities visited by Lot and his family.

Homosexuality does enter into the plot there as one element that characterizes the decadence of Sodom. It is by no means the major factor as both men and women are living lives of disobedience in many ways.

It is always lack of faith and failure to obey God that are the major issues in the Bible; behaviors of various kinds are treated as less significant than the submission of the will to God and what is good.

It's good to see some thoughtful exegesis of the Bible on this forum.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

I have no quam eliminating degenerates for the good of society.

I take it your comments are a combination of genuinely held principles and flights into capricious attempts at satire that border on tasteless camp - or fall into it as you do here.

You are very new here and if you want to be taken seriously under all the rococo gilding, it might be a good idea to state what you really believe before you wander off the path into your own word games.

Personally I find it entertaining, but if you really are a man of honor - which I take very seriously - you need to make that clear, because you are causing considerable bewilderment and disgust.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

Disclaimer, right off the bat: I am not saying homosexuals need to be "fixed".

Ditto, homosexuals are fun and also funny when they joke around. I believe most of those that disagree are addressing there concerns on the radical activist.

I was speaking with a friend of mine and an interesting hypothetical scenario came up:

Lets say at some point in the future medical science discovers that homosexuals are genetically born that way, and it is not a choice or learned behavior. Lets also say that, in conjuction with this discovery, they have also found a way to test an unborn child for whatever this physical trait may be. Now, go one step further, and say that they are also able to 'treat' this trait, ie able to ensure that a child is not born a homosexual. Should this be something that is allowed? Is it something that you, if ever faced with such a choice, would consider doing? Do you think it would be used a lot, or a little, by other future parents?

I don’t believe it’s that simple. There most likely is a gene trait that acts as a catalyst, but I would think it needs to be triggered.
.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

I ... am ... typing ... this ... S-L-O-W-L-Y ... so ... you ... can ... understand: being offended does not mean the other person did something immoral.

Forum rules preclude my giving you the response you deserve.

Originally Posted by ukdude84

Quite the opposite. Honor guides me.

If it did, then you would have given EricOKC the apology that he deserved when you failed to read his post and you chose to insult him. Instead, you chose the path without honor.

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

Disclaimer, right off the bat: I am not saying homosexuals need to be "fixed".

I was speaking with a friend of mine and an interesting hypothetical scenario came up:

Lets say at some point in the future medical science discovers that homosexuals are genetically born that way, and it is not a choice or learned behavior. Lets also say that, in conjuction with this discovery, they have also found a way to test an unborn child for whatever this physical trait may be. Now, go one step further, and say that they are also able to 'treat' this trait, ie able to ensure that a child is not born a homosexual. Should this be something that is allowed? Is it something that you, if ever faced with such a choice, would consider doing? Do you think it would be used a lot, or a little, by other future parents?

Why? It's not an "ailment."

Originally Posted by ThorHammer

Disclaimer, right off the bat: I am not saying homosexuals need to be "fixed".

I was speaking with a friend of mine and an interesting hypothetical scenario came up:

Lets say at some point in the future medical science discovers that homosexuals are genetically born that way, and it is not a choice or learned behavior. Lets also say that, in conjuction with this discovery, they have also found a way to test an unborn child for whatever this physical trait may be. Now, go one step further, and say that they are also able to 'treat' this trait, ie able to ensure that a child is not born a homosexual. Should this be something that is allowed? Is it something that you, if ever faced with such a choice, would consider doing? Do you think it would be used a lot, or a little, by other future parents?

I would consider it for one reason only. If the majority of society held a view towards homosexuals that I read many members of this forum hold I would have it treated simply to spare them from the moral pretentiousness of fools.

edit: But of course I wouldn't. My nephew suffers from a true developmental disorder and no matter how much it hurts to watch him struggle with the idiocy of our society I love him. I'll turn my well educated contempt towards the society that needs the 'fix' instead.

Originally Posted by gnomon

I would consider it for one reason only. If the majority of society held a view towards homosexuals that I read many members of this forum hold I would have it treated simply to spare them from the moral pretentiousness of fools.

edit: But of course I wouldn't. My nephew suffers from a true developmental disorder and no matter how much it hurts to watch him struggle with the idiocy of our society I love him. I'll turn my well educated contempt towards the society that needs the 'fix' instead.

so if you couldve "fixed" that developmental disorder, inutero, you wouldn't do it?

NOTE: not judging or anything, just asking your opinion

Originally Posted by gnomon

I would consider it for one reason only. If the majority of society held a view towards homosexuals that I read many members of this forum hold I would have it treated simply to spare them from the moral pretentiousness of fools.

edit: But of course I wouldn't. My nephew suffers from a true developmental disorder and no matter how much it hurts to watch him struggle with the idiocy of our society I love him. I'll turn my well educated contempt towards the society that needs the 'fix' instead.

We've - the US & Europe - already been through this once - WWII & the Holocaust were a direct result. The Nazis picked up the notion of eugenics from the US. IN - later a KKK stronghold, no coincidence - was one of the 1st states to allow sterilization of feebleminded, insane, habitual criminals, Gypsies & so on. What the initial practitioners & the Nazis found was that anyone who was not Aryan, pale-complected, blonde over blue, was automatically suspected of genetic anomalies. (Except for the ideologically correct Italians & honorary Japanese Aryans, of course.)

I don't think we - people, governments - are wise enough to pick & choose genetic destinies based on ideologies. If we ever get to the point that we unravel all our genetic inheritance & the interactions contained there, & how they play out in the World, we can start to consider the issue. But even then, the temptation to play God will be hard to resist.

Originally Posted by reality

so if you couldve "fixed" that developmental disorder, inutero, you wouldn't do it?

NOTE: not judging or anything, just asking your opinion

Absolutely.

Originally Posted by hoosier88

We've - the US & Europe - already been through this once - WWII & the Holocaust were a direct result. The Nazis picked up the notion of eugenics from the US. IN - later a KKK stronghold, no coincidence - was one of the 1st states to allow sterilization of feebleminded, insane, habitual criminals, Gypsies & so on. What the initial practitioners & the Nazis found was that anyone who was not Aryan, pale-complected, blonde over blue, was automatically suspected of genetic anomalies. (Except for the ideologically correct Italians & honorary Japanese Aryans, of course.)

I don't think we - people, governments - are wise enough to pick & choose genetic destinies based on ideologies. If we ever get to the point that we unravel all our genetic inheritance & the interactions contained there, & how they play out in the World, we can start to consider the issue. But even then, the temptation to play God will be hard to resist.

I don't think the slant of my first post is getting through.

The only way I would consider it, tongue in cheek, is due to the severe homophobic attitude many people carry and the accompanying anxiety, depression, etc. homosexuals, as well as intersex, feel in a society with ignorant views. The so called moral conservative view towards the repeal of DADT and the possibility of recognizing gay marriage is an affront to reason.

I could really care less if I had a child that was straight or gay in regards to that child. Whether or not an individual is gay or straight means no more than if they are black or white, left handed or right handed, freckled or not, it doesn't matter.

I want people to be healthy physically and mentally.

Originally Posted by gnomon

Absolutely.

Ok cool. I was gonna have a serious moral quandry trying to wrap my head around you not doing that lol.

So what if homosexuality is found to be a genetic disorder or something like that? would you "fix" it?