For the homosexuals:

[EyesOfNight]

I question why you consider homosexuality to be a negative deviation.

Are you saying there's a positive side to being homosexual? Think about all the things that homosexuals miss out on and their overall ostracizing from society. Homosexuality may be natural, but it's not normal. There's no reason to remain homosexual if there is the possibility to not be homosexual. I can understand if those who have been homosexual all their lives and have come to accept who they are want to remain so, but why would you then put future generations through the same process? To me it's a no brainer that if you can end homosexuality you should do it.

[Krill]

It's one way of having a 100% chance to control the population size.

[EyesOfNight]

I've heard that argument a million times, and it really holds no merit.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
The very fact that homosexuality deviates from the norm makes it a disorder.

You are an idiot.

[Sirotnikov]

I question why you consider homosexuality to be a negative deviation.

You could theoretisize why homosexuality is supposedly "negative" from a classical "males live to reproduce" PoV (assuming gay males do not normally procreate to have children). I don't think that the discussion should go there, however.

What ever EoN's opinions of gays are, the question he asks is fair: "Would you like to be like the norm?"

Of course, choosing to change insinuates that being gay is somehow 'bad'. But it has to do just as much with the social taboo about being gay, as it has to do with actually craving for penis.

Regarding the higher intelligence example - this is quite applicable.

I have a higher intelligence than most people. I studied in a 'gifted' kids class. As a result of my higher intelligence, my social skills suffered, as is often the case. I had lots of times where I didn't fit in, or suffered because of that.


I'm also an immigrant in Israel. I suffered quite a bit for it. Now, I'm not saying that being a russian immigrant is somehow 'bad', but I might have preferred to be born here, just so I won't suffer from xenophobia of small children.

[Elok]

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
Which changes what? Either way, if it's something that can be cured, the question still stands. As for the person that voted the cure shouldn't be used on future generations, I think you're being awfully selfish. I don't think anyone can honestly say that it's better to be homo than hetero. If you don't want to change, fine, but don't force future generations to go through all the ridicule and obvious setbacks homos endure.

I was just commenting on the depth of your ignorance, especially seeing as you're arguing with Starchild here. More troublesome is your very flawed conception of what constitutes a "disorder."

In psychiatry (which considered homosexuality a disorder until the seventies IIRC), a disorder is a behavior or set of behaviors which prevents the subject from living a happy, productive life. I assume the same is true of the other sciences. "Normal" is a subjective term, and irrelevant. In ancient Sparta most of us would have "non-pederast's disorder." It doesn't matter if you're abnormal if the abnormality does not cause a significant handicap.

The ridicule gays face is not intrinsic to their condition (ridicule rarely is). It stems from our society's attitude towards it. Should we choose to stigmatize the ability to curl our tongues, tongue-curlers would be ridiculed. It's a matter of opinion, but some might say it's simpler to teach a few jerkoffs to stop being rude than to mess with our biochemistry and face possible unforeseen side effects.

While I consider the very idea of gay sex repellent, I can see advantages to being gay. For one thing, you would have a much easier time understanding how your partner thinks, and presumably gays are a lot less clumsy in bed, since they're familiar with all the equipment (remember that episode of Seinfeld?). Et cetera. Idunno, the gays can probably clue us in on that.

[Datajack Franit]

Replace homosexual with black or jewish, and see if your point makes any sense.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
Replace homosexual with black or jewish, and see if your point makes any sense.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=167957

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Elok


I was just commenting on the depth of your ignorance, especially seeing as you're arguing with Starchild here.

Oh, I'm only a simple biochemist.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Starchild


I'd love to correct your staggeringly simplistic and incorrect ideas about genetics and biochemistry but I've got soufflés in the oven.

Good luck. I've seen displays of fantasies in fictitious deities, misunderstandings of molecular biology, genetics and biology and some seriously dodgy genetic ethics.

Let us just suffice to say that if there is a genetic element to homosexuality, it is certainly not going to be the result of one discrete "gay gene" and its effect would probably pale into insignificance compared to not understood and complex environmental factors.

So my vote is for banana in this stupid poll...

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


Good luck.

The soufflés were lovely. They turned out perfectly the first time.

I've made Crème Brûlée flavoured with coffee and now chocolate soufflé. Dunno why people claim these are difficult desserts. Christ, compared to site directed mutagenesis, they're a doddle.

[Provost Harrison]

Site directed mutagenesis...damn, that is a term I haven't heard for a while

[germanos]

If scientists discover this gene before they find a cure to the geneticly determined nagging disorder in women,


I'm serious tempted to have me converted to gayness

[Guynemer]

Perhaps, someday, we'll be able to cure the Eyes of Night gene.

[Provost Harrison]

Why haven't we got an "I would chose to become homo" option?