Would you force your fetus -> heterosexual?

[JohnMK]

There will come a time, in not too many years, when we know how to preclude homosexual outcome in a developing fetus/newborn.

If you had such an option, would you implement it?

If as some scientists conclude, the genes that code or predispose to homosexuality -- enhance male reproductive success (in those who express just enough of them but remain heterosexual), what would be the implications, long-term, in slowly removing these traits, one generation at a time, nudging each fetus ever more certainly heterosexual?

Do you think the state should have a role in what's allowed and what isn't, regarding genetic or other intervention?

Are there other important questions I'm missing?

This issue is very near to me. As a homosexual, I know the inner-pain it is to grow up with these feelings, I know how easy it is for that to turn into self-loathing. I know some people have an iron constitution, super resiliency, and don't have problems but I don't think they are the majority. Growing up a closeted homosexual isn't something I would wish on anybody.

The (Western?) world is becoming more open-minded and accepting, not without a few fits and starts but this is the tendency. So a parent making such an argument as above in reference to a decision to secure a heterosexual outcome will have less and less ground to stand on. That said, it will probably have some merit to it at least for the next couple of decades.

The more convincing and timeless argument might be that they want a higher likelihood of grandchildren. Despite the fact that homosexuals can/will adopt, I believe most people generally prefer their own genetically-related offspring, if the cost of such an enhanced likelihood is not out of reach. Most grandmothers derive a great deal of enjoyment and satisfaction from their children's courtship and pregnancy process. I don't believe these will lose their allure. One could make this argument, at least on an individual basis, and I would have great sympathy with it.

It pains me to say it (and it pains me even more to admit that it pains me, because this exposes some of my irrational nature), but I don't think I could support means to prevent couples or mothers from manipulating their child's sexual outcome. Naturally I don't mean child abuse, and I wouldn't extend the phrase to include passive measures to assure heterosexual outcome.

In a world where such techniques are widely practiced, I don't think homosexuality would die out (see: Stalking the Wild Taboo - Homosexuality for one argument as to why). But it would make homosexuals (as an expressed phenotype) more rare. Part of the reason this feels so wrong to me is the history of homosexuality at least in modern millennia has been one of discrimination, putting it mildly. But it depends on how you frame your desire to have heterosexual offspring.

Black people will continue having black children (at least as a matter of honor), even if it might be better for their children to be white, and even if they had the means to manipulate their child's skin color. Homosexual males don't have an analogous continuity method, except by employing a surrogate mother and intervening at that time to enhance homosexual outcome probability. You'd have to keep up a lineage by surrogacy, and that seems like an awful lot of work to go through just for one purpose, that purpose being the preservation of ONE trait, attraction to the same gender.

If I ever have the good fortune of fatherhood, I will take no measures to influence my child's sexuality, except that it be expressed sincerely. I cannot condemn heterosexuals who want to raise the odds of their children being heterosexual. I see this as eminently understandable on reasoning that in no way includes bigotry. That said, I hope such a practice does not become widely spread. If it became rampant, a homosexual, even in a world accepting of them, would be more lonely and less happy, providing yet more impetus behind a parent's desire for heterosexual offspring.

Somehow, it feels odd for me to support an argument whose natural conclusion is (perhaps) the end of my kind. Perhaps that's why I feel so uneasy in doing so, because my instinct is to avoid extinction?. :eek:

What are your own thoughts?

[jose]

What makes a man attracted to another man? with all the diverse people on this planet, why choose a same sex partner?

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: JohnMK There will come a time, in not too many years, when we know how to preclude homosexual outcome in a developing fetus/newborn.

Or how about this? Some homos are so proud of their orientation that they will use the same technology to produce MORE homo children!

What technology are we talking about anyhoo?

[brien]

Quote by: JohnMK There will come a time, in not too many years, when we know how to preclude homosexual outcome in a developing fetus/newborn. If you had such an option, would you implement it? If as some scientists conclude, the genes that code or predispose to homosexuality -- enhance male reproductive success (in those who express just enough of them but remain heterosexual), what would be the implications, long-term, in slowly removing these traits, one generation at a time, nudging each fetus ever more certainly heterosexual? Do you think the state should have a role in what's allowed and what isn't, regarding genetic or other intervention? Are there other important questions I'm missing? This issue is very near to me. As a homosexual, I know the inner-pain it is to grow up with these feelings, I know how easy it is for that to turn into self-loathing. I know some people have an iron constitution, super resiliency, and don't have problems but I don't think they are the majority. Growing up a closeted homosexual isn't something I would wish on anybody. The (Western?) world is becoming more open-minded and accepting, not without a few fits and starts but this is the tendency. So a parent making such an argument as above in reference to a decision to secure a heterosexual outcome will have less and less ground to stand on. That said, it will probably have some merit to it at least for the next couple of decades. The more convincing and timeless argument might be that they want a higher likelihood of grandchildren. Despite the fact that homosexuals can/will adopt, I believe most people generally prefer their own genetically-related offspring, if the cost of such an enhanced likelihood is not out of reach. Most grandmothers derive a great deal of enjoyment and satisfaction from their children's courtship and pregnancy process. I don't believe these will lose their allure. One could make this argument, at least on an individual basis, and I would have great sympathy with it. It pains me to say it (and it pains me even more to admit that it pains me, because this exposes some of my irrational nature), but I don't think I could support means to prevent couples or mothers from manipulating their child's sexual outcome. Naturally I don't mean child abuse, and I wouldn't extend the phrase to include passive measures to assure heterosexual outcome. In a world where such techniques are widely practiced, I don't think homosexuality would die out (see: Stalking the Wild Taboo - Homosexuality for one argument as to why). But it would make homosexuals (as an expressed phenotype) more rare. Part of the reason this feels so wrong to me is the history of homosexuality at least in modern millennia has been one of discrimination, putting it mildly. But it depends on how you frame your desire to have heterosexual offspring. Black people will continue having black children (at least as a matter of honor), even if it might be better for their children to be white, and even if they had the means to manipulate their child's skin color. Homosexual males don't have an analogous continuity method, except by employing a surrogate mother and intervening at that time to enhance homosexual outcome probability. You'd have to keep up a lineage by surrogacy, and that seems like an awful lot of work to go through just for one purpose, that purpose being the preservation of ONE trait, attraction to the same gender. If I ever have the good fortune of fatherhood, I will take no measures to influence my child's sexuality, except that it be expressed sincerely. I cannot condemn heterosexuals who want to raise the odds of their children being heterosexual. I see this as eminently understandable on reasoning that in no way includes bigotry. That said, I hope such a practice does not become widely spread. If it became rampant, a homosexual, even in a world accepting of them, would be more lonely and less happy, providing yet more impetus behind a parent's desire for heterosexual offspring. Somehow, it feels odd for me to support an argument whose natural conclusion is (perhaps) the end of my kind. Perhaps that's why I feel so uneasy in doing so, because my instinct is to avoid extinction?. :eek: What are your own thoughts?

Please, spare me the whoas me line. There are victims everywhere in society if you look for them. The key to success is to ignore the 20 ways not to do something and find 20 ways to do something. This self loathing business is a trap set by yourself to let yourself off the hook so you don't have to work hard at being a success, homo or no homo.

As far as choosing a lifestyle in the development of a baby, if you so choose, then live with the implications of your decision that you usurp from that individual's genetic makeup. Why stop there? Why not replace blue eyes with brown eyes. Or black skin with pink skin? Or slanted eyes with straighter eyes? Tall for short ?

Do you think the state should have a role in what's allowed and what isn't, regarding genetic or other intervention?

Btw, what does the "state" have to do with this? :confused:

[JohnMK]

Hypothetical technology. If you can imagine it, we can invent it. It's the nature of the beast.

Some homos are so proud of their orientation that they will use the same technology to produce MORE homo children!

That is less practical and there's less reason for it, because the sole trait desired is one of attraction to same gender in their immediate offspring, whereas a heterosexual would conceivably do it because they want more grandchildren within the duration of their own lifespan. I think that's a less singular and less narrow desire.

[JohnMK]

Quote by: brien Please, spare me the whoas me line. There are victims everywhere in society if you look for them. The key to success is to ignore the 20 ways not to do something and find 20 ways to do something. This self loathing business is a trap set by yourself to let yourself off the hook so you don't have to work hard at being a success, homo or no homo.

You misinterpret me, Sir.

The point of my personal anecdote was to illustrate how other homosexuals might feel, not a solicitation for advice or pity on my life. It's quite right to point out that they should NOT feel this way. But that doesn't make it so. People are not rational robots, especially at a young age. To a great extent, further education also seems to make us LESS rational in certain areas.

Btw, what does the "state" have to do with this? :confused:

I am asking you for your opinion, and I think you've given it. I think we are of like mind.

[brien]

Quote by: JohnMK You misinterpret me, Sir. The point of my personal anecdote was to illustrate how other homosexuals might feel, not a solicitation for advice or pity on my life. It's quite right to point out that they should NOT feel this way. But that doesn't make it so. People are not rational robots, especially at a young age. To a great extent, further education also seems to make us LESS rational in certain areas. I am asking you for your opinion, and I think you've given it. I think we are of like mind.

Sorry if I misunderstand you john. I didn't mean to offend but rather wish to point out that people need to quit feeling sorry for themselves and taking on the role of victimization. If we all did this, then where would society be in the end? Surely eveyone could find something in society for which they can be a victim. The trick is to find that which empowers us as individuals and not let others keep us down.

[Mia]

yes

[JohnMK]

How about some precision on top of concision? (unless you're replying to brien's post, which I agree with).

Come to think of it, this is the only reasonable interpretation of your post I can think of.

[underbear1]

Parents could do worse than having a gay/lesbian child, we take good care of OUR parents in their golden years....(unless they threw us out in our teens.) If technology makes it possible to have straight or gay kids, some people will choose each type. Some like the parents who don't want to know the sex of their child before birth, will also allow their sexuality to be determined by fate/luck/random chance.

[JohnMK]

Regarding the technology, it's just a matter of time, underbear1.

And I think you're right.

Do you take your baby . . . organic?

[belverron]

Quote by: brien Sorry if I misunderstand you john. I didn't mean to offend but rather wish to point out that people need to quit feeling sorry for themselves and taking on the role of victimization. If we all did this, then where would society be in the end? Surely eveyone could find something in society for which they can be a victim. The trick is to find that which empowers us as individuals and not let others keep us down.

It's one thing to say that. I don't feel particularly victimized, but I do feel limited. What can I say in the workplace? What kind of people will accept me?

Also, I never had this experience, but I have so many friends who "don't get along with their parents." I always ask why, and the answer's almost always the same. It's because they're gay. And they're overcoming these obstacles, not being victims. But it still makes you think, This is a screwed-up world.

Anyway, I'm agin' it, of course. There are few enough gays as it is.

[The Bacon Guy]

Well, on a personal level, I'd be inclined to make the kid hetero. If he's gay, there's always a good chance of him being victimised for his sexuality. Being hetero, that chance is next to zero. Making the kid hetero is the best way to minimise suffering on his part (although actually not having kids in the first place is the best way to do this).

However, on a social level, it's definitely a bad idea. Like others mentioned, it would lead to homosexuality being seen as a negative trait and hence more discrimination against them. There is more to gain from trying to improve society, rather than going for quick fixes. In light of this, I'd be against it.

[JohnMK]

Should I take that to mean you think it should be illegal?

I suspect in some countries that step will be taken.

[underbear1]

ANY parent who doesn't think they could respect, protect, and love a gay/lesbian child............shouldn't attempt parenthood, you don't have what it takes IMO.

[Matt W]

Quote by: underbear1 ANY parent who doesn't think they could respect, protect, and love a gay/lesbian child............shouldn't attempt parenthood, you don't have what it takes IMO.

Thanks for that, underbear1. Now, have you anything to add on-topic?

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: John Should I take that to mean you think it should be illegal?

I’m always uneasy about criminalizing anything which does not have a direct victim. When I said I was against it, I meant that I personally wouldn’t do it and that I don’t think it should be available on public health or be funded by the government in any way.

Criminalizing it is another matter though. While I don’t think it will be a good thing for society if this technology becomes available, the libertarian in me asks why people should be forced to do what’s good for society. Also, there is no way for me to prove that it will have a negative effect on society and any victims of this procedure would be purely speculative. Therefore, I don't think it should be made illegal unless it causes direct and verifiable harm.

Quote by: John I suspect in some countries that step will be taken.

You really think it will be possible in the future? Don't you think homosexuality is more complex than a simple genetic trait?

[JohnMK]

I don't know of many technological advances that didn''t involve complexity and investment. Sooner or later, we will be able to manipulate these types of things, and people will have this type of debate, although I doubt it'll be this civil.

[kubedawg]

This seems to be a big issue these days and moreso probably in the near future. What we need to focus on is parenting, no matter what the child's orientation, however, I do think it is a good idea to let the child know these things and that it's not wrong to be gay, just as it's not wrong to be straight, however, explain the differences as best you can. I wouldn't mind if I had a gay or lebian child. In fact, I wouldn't care if my child had some crazy disease, I'd still love my kid the way I would if he/she had grown up straight, or with no disease. Love is love. You can't deny that, noone can. I hear a lot of people say well love is technically the elecrolytes this neutrons that, I really don't care the technical part of it at all. Love is an emotion everyone feels, and seperating someone from love is one of the worst things I would personally have to endure.

[brien]

Quote by: belverron It's one thing to say that. I don't feel particularly victimized, but I do feel limited. What can I say in the workplace? What kind of people will accept me? Also, I never had this experience, but I have so many friends who "don't get along with their parents." I always ask why, and the answer's almost always the same. It's because they're gay. And they're overcoming these obstacles, not being victims. But it still makes you think, This is a screwed-up world. Anyway, I'm agin' it, of course. There are few enough gays as it is.

What can I say in the workplace?

Why do you have to say anything? What does it matter? Idle chit chat about sexual relationships shouldn't be graphic anyway. Why are you concerned about being accpeted? When you stop being concerned about what others think of you, you will allow yourself to move ahead with fewer personal restrictions in life. Do those who you are concerned with for acceptance pay your bills?

but I have so many friends who "don't get along with their parents

This is quite normal, no matter what their sexual orientation. Maturity tends to resolve this issue.

I always ask why, and the answer's almost always the same. It's because they're gay

.

Well then the parents need to work toward better acceptance of their children. There will come a day when these parents may realize they love their children no matter what their sexual orientation, and if they don't, then they aren't worthy of being parents in the first instance. Furthermore, they will probably regret the time lost in thier bigotry.

But it still makes you think, This is a screwed-up world.

And so, are you implying this is unique in affecting the gay population? Let me assure you the gays have no corner on the effects of this screwed up world.