Export thread

"Homosexuality - Is it a problem in need of a cure?" - CNN

#1



Steven Soderburgin



Just so you know, Richard Cohen is a conversion therapist who has been widely disgraced and discredited. He was expelled from the ACA for ethics violations.


#2

Shegokigo

Shegokigo

This again?

Is it that time of the year already?


#3



Steven Soderburgin

Next up on CNN: Black people - should they go back to Africa?


#4

Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Shegokigo said:
This again?

Is it that time of the year already?
Click to expand...
It's spring and like the animals, the conservatives are in heat.


#5



Andromache

the cure for homosexuality is of course, lots of homosexual sex. You're welcome.


#6



Steven Soderburgin

Andromache said:
the cure for homosexuality is of course, lots of homosexual sex. You're welcome.
Click to expand...
False. I am still gay.


#7

MindDetective

MindDetective

Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?


#8

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

MindDetective said:
Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?
Click to expand...
Sounds an awful lot like mind control to me.


#9



Andromache

Steven Soderburgin;367394][QUOTE=Andromache said:
the cure for homosexuality is of course, lots of homosexual sex. You're welcome.
Click to expand...
False. I am still gay.[/QUOTE]

Keep trying. It may take a few hundred years.

---------- Post added at 06:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:31 PM ----------
MindDetective said:
Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?
Click to expand...

Let's posit an even DIFFERENT QUESTION: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to "spiritual belief" in some theological universal being. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?

I kinda like this game.


#10

North_Ranger

North_Ranger

Okay, not two minutes in and there's the argument about "sexual predators".

Why is it that news from the USA almost always make me want to beat someone's face to a table?


#11

Necronic

Necronic

MindDetective said:
Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?
Click to expand...
Would it be wrong to switch it on in everyone to control population growth?

Edit: Also, The Mutant bears his Heresy on the outside;


#12

MindDetective

MindDetective

Andromache;367412][/COLOR][QUOTE=MindDetective said:
Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?
Click to expand...

Let's posit an even DIFFERENT QUESTION: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to "spiritual belief" in some theological universal being. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?

I kinda like this game.[/QUOTE]

Lots o' fun.


#13



Chibibar

I always wonder, taking religion aside (don't consider it in this equation) why even bother "curing" homosexuals if it does exist? why can people let them be happy in their own way? Do human have to fear what they don't understand to a level to "kill it with fire" type of thing? If people are seeking help on their own, then help them, but if they are happy in their sexual lives (legal of course) then let them be.

Edit: Richard Cohen is not making sense. ex-homosexuality? I am thinking it is more he is homo-curious. I think he is speaking BS.


#14

Shaw Coyote

Shaw Coyote

This is why I'm happy I grew up in a fairly liberal small town.


#15

Bowielee

Bowielee

Chibibar said:
I always wonder, taking religion aside (don't consider it in this equation) why even bother "curing" homosexuals if it does exist? why can people let them be happy in their own way? Do human have to fear what they don't understand to a level to "kill it with fire" type of thing? If people are seeking help on their own, then help them, but if they are happy in their sexual lives (legal of course) then let them be.

Edit: Richard Cohen is not making sense. ex-homosexuality? I am thinking it is more he is homo-curious. I think he is speaking BS.
Click to expand...
Heh... former homosexual.

If a dog is trained to walk on two legs, it doesn't make him a man. He's just a dog who's been trained to act like a man.


#16

Baerdog

Baerdog

Someone is gay and the only cure is more cowbell!



#17

Rob King

Rob King

Necronic;367421][QUOTE=MindDetective said:
Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?
Click to expand...
Would it be wrong to switch it on in everyone to control population growth?

Edit: Also, The Mutant bears his Heresy on the outside;[/QUOTE]

Wow. I never thought of that.

I might actually be in favor of this.


#18

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Steven Soderburgin said:
*snip

Just so you know, Richard Cohen is a conversion therapist who has been widely disgraced and discredited. He was expelled from the ACA for ethics violations.
Click to expand...
CNN is just trying to ramp up discussions. They are essentially trolling the Cable Channels for an audience. Shock the left with this guy's BS or titillate the right with this guy's BS.


#19



Steven Soderburgin

I understand, but it's a disturbing trend (and I know it's not really particularly new, but this was a very recent, pretty personally offensive example to me) of the media presenting two sides as equals and letting the viewer decide in an effort to be fair rather than reporting facts. What's next, getting a Holocaust denier and a Israeli ambassador to talk about whether the Holocaust really happened? It's not journalism.


#20

Espy

Espy

Steven Soderburgin said:
It's not journalism.
Click to expand...
Wait... was there a time when cable news was journalism?


#21

Dave

Dave

Journalism has nothing to do with 95% of the stuff on cable news. The channels are too slanted and merely pander to whichever group with which they associate. To top it off, with a 24 hour news cycle and so much competition, they are replacing tough questions from real reporters with Twitter feeds from @imadipshit and blog posts from some schmuck in his mom's basement.

I think it would be infinitely funny if they tried to scientifically tried to find a cure for homosexuality and found that being a white heterosexual male was an aberration from the genetic norm and was curable. I mean, I don't understand homosexuality but I also don't understand how people can eat liver. And homosexuals who eat liver are just freaks.

But homosexuality is not a genetic illness to be cured.


#22



Steven Soderburgin

Espy;367665][QUOTE=Steven Soderburgin said:
It's not journalism.
Click to expand...
Wait... was there a time when cable news was journalism?[/QUOTE]CNN has always been pretty awful. I like Anderson Cooper (and not just because he's dreamy and clearly gay). There are a couple good people on MSNBC, too.


#23



Chazwozel

Steven Soderburgin said:
Next up on CNN: Black people - should they go back to Africa?
Click to expand...

Yes and yes. You sinner!

---------- Post added at 11:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 AM ----------
Espy;367665][QUOTE=Steven Soderburgin said:
It's not journalism.
Click to expand...
Wait... was there a time when cable news was journalism?[/QUOTE]

Yup 24/7 cable news is not journalism. There's about 15 minutes worth of journalism each day on the news networks; the rest is lovely, lovely filler.


#24

Espy

Espy

Chazwozel said:
[/COLOR]
Espy;367665][QUOTE=Steven Soderburgin said:
It's not journalism.
Click to expand...
Wait... was there a time when cable news was journalism?
Click to expand...
Yup 24/7 cable news is not journalism. There's about 15 minutes worth of journalism each day on the news networks; the rest is lovely, lovely filler.[/QUOTE]

Unless it's the guy/gal you agree with then it's journalism. Because they are right.:p


#25



Andromache

Chazwozel said:
Yup 24/7 cable news is not journalism. There's about 15 minutes worth of journalism each day on the news networks; the rest is lovely, lovely filler.
Click to expand...
but there are 100 news networks on cable...

oh you meant in the US? right. 3.


#26



Chibibar

Dave said:
Journalism has nothing to do with 95% of the stuff on cable news. The channels are too slanted and merely pander to whichever group with which they associate. To top it off, with a 24 hour news cycle and so much competition, they are replacing tough questions from real reporters with Twitter feeds from @imadipshit and blog posts from some schmuck in his mom's basement.

I think it would be infinitely funny if they tried to scientifically tried to find a cure for homosexuality and found that being a white heterosexual male was an aberration from the genetic norm and was curable. I mean, I don't understand homosexuality but I also don't understand how people can eat liver. And homosexuals who eat liver are just freaks.

But homosexuality is not a genetic illness to be cured.
Click to expand...
oh man. I like liver!! :) I also love Cow Blood Soup (Chinese delicacy) I love my homosexual friends... so I guess I'm a proud half freak?


#27



Chazwozel

I'd actually love to see the Blacks shipped back to Africa debate, Kissinger is foreshadowing.

Debate: Con-debator: Well African American culture arose during the ...blah blah blah...30 mintues later... in closing, African Americans are a part of American culture and...hurp de durp...

Pro-debator: UR ONE OF DEM NAAGGGERRRR LOVERS AINTCHA!??!?!?


#28



Steven Soderburgin

The pro side would literally be a member of the KKK

At the end, the CNN anchor would say "Well, clearly there's a lot to talk about with this issue. Moving on..."


#29



Chazwozel

Steven Soderburgin said:
The pro side would literally be a member of the KKK

At the end, the CNN anchor would say "Well, clearly there's a lot to talk about with this issue. Moving on..."
Click to expand...

..moving on to our next debate... Mexicans: ARE THEY TAKIN OUR JEERRRBBBS!??!


#30

SpecialKO

SpecialKO

Chazwozel;367823][QUOTE=Steven Soderburgin said:
The pro side would literally be a member of the KKK

At the end, the CNN anchor would say "Well, clearly there's a lot to talk about with this issue. Moving on..."
Click to expand...

..moving on to our next debate... Mexicans: ARE THEY TAKIN OUR JEERRRBBBS!??![/QUOTE]

...and are they really from the future, and should we all turn gay to prevent it from happening?


#31



Chazwozel

TeKeo;367837][QUOTE=Chazwozel;367823][QUOTE=Steven Soderburgin said:
The pro side would literally be a member of the KKK

At the end, the CNN anchor would say "Well, clearly there's a lot to talk about with this issue. Moving on..."
Click to expand...

..moving on to our next debate... Mexicans: ARE THEY TAKIN OUR JEERRRBBBS!??![/QUOTE]

...and are they really from the future, and should we all turn gay to prevent it from happening?[/QUOTE]

MY GOD! It's all come full circle! Shipping Blacks out to Africa is creating a job void here in America which is being filled by Mexicans- who are from the future - causing a epigenetic switch to trigger activation of the 'gay gene' which in turn causes massive buttfucking outbreaks across the country, and debates over said outbreaks, which then lead to debates over shipping blacks out to Africa!


#32

Fun Size

Fun Size

Homosexuality is an illness that totally needs to be cured. I base this on the strong evidence that a man has never come onto me. Thus, it must be unnatural and wrong.

I rest my case, your honor.


#33



Disconnected

Show more skin Fun size.


#34

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Disconnected said:
Show more skin Fun size.
Click to expand...
Or grow a biker mustache...

It worked for my Redneck Brother. Even though we told him for years that his mustache was a gay stereotype, he would not believe us. Until 2 guys hit on him in the Automotive Section Wal-Mart (of all places.)

He shaved that night.


#35



Kitty Sinatra

sixpackshaker said:
He shaved that night.
Click to expand...
After the buttsex though, right?


#36

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Gruebeard;367971][QUOTE=sixpackshaker said:
He shaved that night.
Click to expand...
After the buttsex though, right?[/QUOTE]

no, after the love that knows no name...


#37



Steven Soderburgin

OH NO HOW AWFUL


CAN'T HAVE ANYONE THINK THAT HE MIGHT BE A GAY


#38



Kitty Sinatra

Who thinks I'm gay?

I'LL BASH THEIR TEETH IN!


#39



Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
Who thinks I'm gay?

I'LL BASH THEIR TEETH IN!
Click to expand...
with yo dilz


#40

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Steven Soderburgin said:
OH NO HOW AWFUL


CAN'T HAVE ANYONE THINK THAT HE MIGHT BE A GAY
Click to expand...
Do you find it odd when some one completely misidentifies you?

It is called sexual identity for a reason.

And it is better that it happened after he had mellowed quite a bit.


#41



Steven Soderburgin

A little bit, but a quick correction and all is well. I imagine that your brother shaving his mustache had more to do with a societal stigma associated with being gay than it had to do with the mere fact that he was misidentified.

But WHATEVS


#42



Chazwozel

Steven Soderburgin said:
A little bit, but a quick correction and all is well. I imagine that your brother shaving his mustache had more to do with a societal stigma associated with being gay than it had to do with the mere fact that he was misidentified.

But WHATEVS
Click to expand...
This has inspired me to wear ass-less chaps and a leather biker hat for a week.


#43

Dave

Dave

Chazwozel;367990][QUOTE=Steven Soderburgin said:
A little bit, but a quick correction and all is well. I imagine that your brother shaving his mustache had more to do with a societal stigma associated with being gay than it had to do with the mere fact that he was misidentified.

But WHATEVS
Click to expand...
This has inspired me to wear ass-less chaps and a leather biker hat for a week.[/QUOTE]

Again?


#44



Steven Soderburgin

Chazwozel said:
This has inspired me to wear ass-less chaps and a leather biker hat for a week.
Click to expand...
Man, wear what you want. As long as you ain't hurtin' no one, then do what makes you happy.


#45



Kitty Sinatra

I think Steven Sodombugger is hitting on you, Chaz.


#46

Gusto

Gusto

Gruebeard said:
I think Steven Sodombugger is hitting on you, Chaz.
Click to expand...
Jesus, dude.


#47



Steven Soderburgin

Gruebeard said:
I think Steven Sodombugger is hitting on you, Chaz.
Click to expand...
I ain't into leather.


#48



Kitty Sinatra

Too far?

If so, sorry, Kissinger


#49



Steven Soderburgin

Apology accepted, moving on


SO to get back to the topic, this whole "Presenting both sides as equals even if one side is completely, demonstrably false" thing on the news is terrible and stupid.


#50

Rob King

Rob King

I hesitate to stick my neck out at all, because I am of the opinion that homosexuality is not a problem, and not in need of a cure. But it does strike me as a question worth considering, even if for only a moment.

I mean, from an evolutionary standpoint homosexuality is bizarre. Yes, other animals do have gay sex, but those animals also have heterosexual sex in order to propagate the species, so at best I would call them bisexual. And by that logic, bisexuality would make perfect sense in humanity. But in a biological and/or evolutionary sense, there doesn't seem to be any long-term advantage to the existence of pure homosexuals.

Again, to clarify, I am not anti-gay. Even if I believed such a thing were possible, I wouldn't support the 'curing' of homosexuals. Personally, I feel like we're at the point where we are mature enough in our human culture where we can be bigger than what biology or evolution dictates. For that reason I see no benefit to 'curing' homosexuals (if I might use such crass vernacular). But I can see why others might feel differently.

That said, 90% of those who will flock to the 'unnatural' argument aren't there because they see that it makes sense or agree with it. Fuck, 90% of them don't even believe in evolution to begin with. But I can see why somebody, not everybody, but somebody might think that way.


#51



Steven Soderburgin

There's a really interesting episode of This American Life about how homosexuality's designation as a disorder in the DSM was changed and the reasons and implications behind that change. You can stream it free here: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-Words


#52

ThatGrinningIdiot!

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Rob do you mean to imply that from a purely biological-evolutionary view that homosexuals are simply "dead-ends" as they do not contribute to the populace?


#53

Rob King

Rob King

ThatGrinningIdiot! said:
Rob do you mean to imply that from a purely biological-evolutionary view that homosexuals are simply "dead-ends" as they do not contribute to the populace?
Click to expand...
Given that they would not contribute biologically to the next generation if they could help it, I'm saying that it is not strange to me that some would think of homosexuality as unnatural, and that someone might conclude that (were it possible) 'curing' homosexuals would be a good idea.

Kissinger, I'm listening to that radio program now. Promises to be interesting. I think we touch briefly on the subject in my Mental Health Ethics course I did a few years ago, but that course had more to do with the history of treatment of depression and schizophrenics than 'sexual deviants.'


#54



Andromache

I heard Rob King was posting in this thread, so I brought my protests signs and torches. Just in case.


#55

Rob King

Rob King

Steven Soderburgin said:
There's a really interesting episode of This American Life about how homosexuality's designation as a disorder in the DSM was changed and the reasons and implications behind that change. You can stream it free here: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-Words
Click to expand...
Awesome. Just finished up listening a few minutes ago. A fascinating story, and one that makes a hell of a lot of sense. I can see why some of the opponents of the change acted like they did. It was pointed out at the end that all studies that had been done on homosexuals were done on homosexuals who were already institutionalized for other reasons. If you take for granted that homosexuality fucks a person up, and the climate is such that well-adjusted homosexuals keep mostly underground, that homosexuality is a pathology seems to be a perfectly reasonable conclusion. And the behavior of gay activists mentioned in the program seemed largely unhelpful too.

Still though, it does not make 'homosexuality is unnatural' a impossible argument. It's not a pathology, yes, or any other sort of disorder. It would seem that the world is agreed on that. But were a 'gay gene' identified, the fact that it isn't a disorder won't save it from scrutiny. Neither will the fact that homosexuals can live just as full and enriching lives as anyone else.


#56



Chazwozel

Rob King said:
I hesitate to stick my neck out at all, because I am of the opinion that homosexuality is not a problem, and not in need of a cure. But it does strike me as a question worth considering, even if for only a moment.

I mean, from an evolutionary standpoint homosexuality is bizarre. Yes, other animals do have gay sex, but those animals also have heterosexual sex in order to propagate the species, so at best I would call them bisexual. And by that logic, bisexuality would make perfect sense in humanity. But in a biological and/or evolutionary sense, there doesn't seem to be any long-term advantage to the existence of pure homosexuals.

Again, to clarify, I am not anti-gay. Even if I believed such a thing were possible, I wouldn't support the 'curing' of homosexuals. Personally, I feel like we're at the point where we are mature enough in our human culture where we can be bigger than what biology or evolution dictates. For that reason I see no benefit to 'curing' homosexuals (if I might use such crass vernacular). But I can see why others might feel differently.

That said, 90% of those who will flock to the 'unnatural' argument aren't there because they see that it makes sense or agree with it. Fuck, 90% of them don't even believe in evolution to begin with. But I can see why somebody, not everybody, but somebody might think that way.
Click to expand...
Actually evolution does dictate a percentage of a population to be homosexual or non reproducing.


#57

Rob King

Rob King

Chazwozel said:
Actually evolution does dictate a percentage of a population to be homosexual or non reproducing.
Click to expand...
Wow. I didn't know that. Are you able to elaborate a bit?

(Huh. I never realized how bad this place can sometimes get until I had to re-write that sentence about a dozen times to make it clear that I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all)


#58



Kitty Sinatra

And you still came off as incredibly sarcastic :p


#59

Morphine

Morphine

MindDetective said:
Let me posit a different question: Let's say a gene is identified that, if active, leads to homosexuality. Would it be wrong or unethical to universally modify that gene so that future generations will never have it?
Click to expand...
It would be the end of it all. Overpopulation is bad enough as it is, imagine what would happen if everybody was straight. Ugh, I don't even want to imagine that horrendous scenery...


#60



Kitty Sinatra

I don't think an extra 3 percent of the population procreating will have any significant effect - especially since those being "cured" will mostly live in Industrialized regions where birth rates are really damn low, and there are plenty of homosexuals who have procreated, anyway.


#61

Bowielee

Bowielee

How many times do I have to explain this to you cretins?

ALL chaps are ass-less. If they weren't they'd be LEATHER PANTS.


#62

Jay

Jay

What I feel about homosexuality is...



It's a beautiful thing.


#63

Rob King

Rob King

That brought a tear to my eye, and a rush of blood to ...

... I'll be in my bunk.


#64



Steven Soderburgin

http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/04/09/CNN_Responds_to_Exgay_Segment_Critics/
CNN aired a segment Thursday that responded to the outcry over the network’s decision to host discredited “ex-gay” therapist Richard Cohen for a segment Tuesday about “curing” homosexuality. Host Kyra Phillips reported that she received “vicious emails” and “hateful messages” because of the segment.

On Tuesday, Phillips spoke with Cohen and Bonnie Lowenthal, a California assemblyman sponsoring a bill to repeal an archaic law that encourages the state to research gay “cures.” The segment asked the question, “Homosexuality: Is it a problem in need of a cure?”

GLAAD issued a “call to action” that faulted CNN over the decision to host Cohen with no mention of his being discredited, and to entertain the question of “curing” gay people.

On Thursday, CNN aired a follow-up with Clinton Anderson of the American Psychological Association. \"Homosexuality is not a mental disorder or a disease,\" he said.

Phillips also addressed the criticism she has received.

“And before we go to break I would like to take a moment to address many of you who emailed me about our Tuesday segment on this topic. Personally, I thought the absurd nature of the California law we discussed would speak for itself but unfortunately not everyone saw it that way.

“Richard Cohen was not the most appropriate guest to have on, but it is a decision that we made and the result of that is our continued discussion today. That is what journalism is all about and we will continue to do our best to discuss gay and lesbian issues in a fair way on this program.

“I wish that all of you knew my heart. And as a journalist with a long track record of covering gay and lesbian issues, I wish that those of you who sent me vicious emails watched my newscasts more often because if they did my guess is they would not have been so quick to send such hateful messages.

“They don’t know my record and my unswerving support for all communities in the battle for human rights, including gays, lesbians, and transgendered individuals. And to make it perfectly clear, I love debating issues, it evokes passion. But if we cannot treat each other in a civil manner, even when we disagree, then we will never move forward and have a world where all people are treated with the respect that they deserve.”
Click to expand...
You can watch the segment at the link


#65

North_Ranger

North_Ranger

Rob King;368109][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
Actually evolution does dictate a percentage of a population to be homosexual or non reproducing.
Click to expand...
Wow. I didn't know that. Are you able to elaborate a bit?

(Huh. I never realized how bad this place can sometimes get until I had to re-write that sentence about a dozen times to make it clear that I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all)[/QUOTE]

I'm not a scientist like our lifetime-member-of-the-Blue-Oyster shark here, but I do recall the argument about the evolutionary value of homosexuality being discussed in a popular science journal I ordered a few years back. Can't find the article, though... and it's in Finnish anyway. Basically, the argument by some anthropologists was that the less masculine and more feminine behaviour of homosexual males among early hominids was actually a kind of method to make sure that as many children as possible grew up. The argument was that the presence of gay males curbed some of the aggressive tendencies of the other males, and they helped the females in rearing the children of the pack/tribe/group.

As for lesbians... the article didn't say.


#66



Violent Drunk Ray Romano

North_Ranger;368383][QUOTE=Rob King;368109][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
Actually evolution does dictate a percentage of a population to be homosexual or non reproducing.
Click to expand...
Wow. I didn't know that. Are you able to elaborate a bit?

(Huh. I never realized how bad this place can sometimes get until I had to re-write that sentence about a dozen times to make it clear that I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all)[/QUOTE]

I'm not a scientist like our lifetime-member-of-the-Blue-Oyster shark here, but I do recall the argument about the evolutionary value of homosexuality being discussed in a popular science journal I ordered a few years back. Can't find the article, though... and it's in Finnish anyway. Basically, the argument by some anthropologists was that the less masculine and more feminine behaviour of homosexual males among early hominids was actually a kind of method to make sure that as many children as possible grew up. The argument was that the presence of gay males curbed some of the aggressive tendencies of the other males, and they helped the females in rearing the children of the pack/tribe/group.

As for lesbians... the article didn't say.[/QUOTE]

You're referring to the same studies I am. +1 Science for you! There's other shit too, like a particular species of prairie dog. While not having anything to do with homosexuality, some of these little guys act as an alarm system for the entire prairie dog town. In essence they will make a high pitch noise to warn the colony that predators are around. This behavior is thought to be counter-adaptive, in that these dog's are at higher risk to being eaten and not breed (thus not passing on the genes). It gets more complicated than that, but the overall story is that as a whole the population benefits much more with these individuals than without them.

I absolutely hate it when people come out with the argument that homosexuality is something 'unnatural' and against our desire to create offspring. Species survival functions as whole populations; not individuals.


#67

Rob King

Rob King

So the argument is that, just like the suicidal alarm-sounding prairie dogs, there is a social benefit to homosexuality? I can definitely buy that. But in the prairie-dog example, I would assume that the alarm dogs have reproduced, and/or that every animal could raise the alarm and be eaten, it's just a matter of circumstance which sees who goes and who doesn't.

But if homosexuality were an inherited trait (is it? I don't know) how would it be passed on? I mean ... in the past, sure, homosexuals stay closeted and many of them take on spouses to keep up appearances. But we're seemingly past (or, getting there) the stage where even homosexuals are coerced into reproduction. Would there, then, be a worry that homosexuality might yet be bred out?


#68



Violent Drunk Ray Romano

Rob King said:
So the argument is that, just like the suicidal alarm-sounding prairie dogs, there is a social benefit to homosexuality? I can definitely buy that. But in the prairie-dog example, I would assume that the alarm dogs have reproduced, and/or that every animal could raise the alarm and be eaten, it's just a matter of circumstance which sees who goes and who doesn't.

But if homosexuality were an inherited trait (is it? I don't know) how would it be passed on? I mean ... in the past, sure, homosexuals stay closeted and many of them take on spouses to keep up appearances. But we're seemingly past (or, getting there) the stage where even homosexuals are coerced into reproduction. Would there, then, be a worry that homosexuality might yet be bred out?
Click to expand...
In my professional opinion, I don't believe there is a homosexuality gene that specifically get's 'turned on' to make you gay. I think it's a very complex set of things that get balanced out as an individual grows based off that individuals hormonal levels, environment, and yes, genetic makeup. Being gay or straight is no different than being tall or short, fat or skinny. It's just what happens as a roll of the dice as you as an individual develop.

As far as homosexuality and its role in society. I don't know. That's not my field of expertise, but I know a couple guys who are, more or less, populations biologists I can ask.


#69

Rob King

Rob King

Violent Drunk Ray Romano said:
As far as homosexuality and its role in society. I don't know. That's not my field of expertise, but I know a couple guys who are, more or less, populations biologists I can ask.
Click to expand...
Cool, yeah. I mean, I realize I can be a bit of a nerd sometimes, but I'd be interested to see what they would have to say, even if it's just a ten word version.

Honestly, the thing that makes me most fearful in this whole discussion is what would happen if some 'gay gene' were to be found. It would be a fucking mess. Again, I don't hold the belief personally, but we all know that homosexuality as an aberration is a pretty widespread opinion. And it doesn't take much looking around to see an (arguably) more black-and-white example. I have read of deaf people who have had children born with curable conditions eschewing treatment that will allow their children to hear based on the desire to foster a deaf family identity.

What I'm saying is that lots of people think that homosexuality is acceptable and normal. Much fewer people think that deafness is a positive trait, and even so, there have been people interfering with the treatment of others in order to include or exclude people from the deaf community. Could you imagine a choose-your-child's-sexuality option? A fucking mess.


#70

bhamv3

bhamv3

Rob, I gotta say... you should never apologize for wanting to learn.


#71



Andromache

bhamv3 said:
Rob, I gotta say... you should never apologize for wanting to learn.
Click to expand...
No. He should apologize for not living up to his last name. Serious Disappointment.


#72

Null

Null

Dave said:
I think it would be infinitely funny if they tried to scientifically tried to find a cure for homosexuality and found that being a white heterosexual male was an aberration from the genetic norm and was curable. I mean, I don't understand homosexuality but I also don't understand how people can eat liver. And homosexuals who eat liver are just freaks.

But homosexuality is not a genetic illness to be cured.
Click to expand...
Actually, something like that came up inJoe Haldeman's "The Forever War" - as culture shifted over thousands of years, homosexuality was regimented as a method of birth control, with offspring coming through in vitro fertilization. Add genetic engineering into the mix and by the end of the War, there was Man, a cloned hivemind. The veterans of the war - some having been born in the 20th century and through relativistic space travel surviving until something like the 32nd millenia - were used as a 'genetic bank' for their non-engineered DNA. The protagonist, a white heterosexual male, was called "The Old Queer" by his troops, all of whom had grown up in eras where homosexuality was the norm.


#73

Rob King

Rob King

Andromache;368924][QUOTE=bhamv3 said:
Rob, I gotta say... you should never apologize for wanting to learn.
Click to expand...
No. He should apologize for not living up to his last name. Serious Disappointment.[/QUOTE]

I don't even know what that means :S


#74



Kitty Sinatra

I think she's calling you a queen.


#75

Green_Lantern

Green_Lantern

I actually read that a theory/hipothesis about how homosexuality wasn't "breed out" of the gene pool, it affirmed that women that are related to gay men usually have more kids and aparently keep the "gay gene" in humankind, makes you wonder if it isn't a "Want-to-bang-a-dude gene", I hope there is the case because I pretty sure that if it isn't... well genetic detection will make sure that homosexuality will be aborted from the future.


#76



Chazwozel

Green_Lantern said:
I actually read that a theory/hipothesis about how homosexuality wasn't "breed out" of the gene pool, it affirmed that women that are related to gay men usually have more kids and aparently keep the "gay gene" in humankind, makes you wonder if it isn't a "Want-to-bang-a-dude gene", I hope there is the case because I pretty sure that if it isn't... well genetic detection will make sure that homosexuality will be aborted from the future.
Click to expand...
Ah the age old epigenetics debate.



#77

Baerdog

Baerdog

Speaking of GATTACA, is there a gene that determines which hand you hold your tallywhacker with when you pee?


#78



Chazwozel

Baerdog said:
Speaking of GATTACA, is there a gene that determines which hand you hold your tallywhacker with when you pee?
Click to expand...

Probably the same one that causes you to be right or left handed.


#79

Jay

Jay

You people are fail. Only one comment about my link.

You're all gays.


#80

Rob King

Rob King

I had forgotten what the link was, so I just checked it again.

Jay, you are doing nothing to help cure me of my compulsive masturbation :Leyla:


#81

Jay

Jay

Just whip it out and beat it.

There's the cure.


#82

Rob King

Rob King

Oh my god! It works!


#83

Jay

Jay

Everyone just whip it out and beat it.

Nothing matters anymore.


#84

Rob King

Rob King

I feel like we should found an annual Halforums Jerk for the Cure fundraiser.


#85



Steven Soderburgin

Rob King said:
I feel like we should found an annual Halforums Jerk for the Cure fundraiser.
Click to expand...
I'd bring in the most money.


fakeedit: Oh wait, it's not "Be a Jerk for the Cure"


fakeedit2: Can we count other people jerking us?


#86

Baerdog

Baerdog


.


Top