It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will G.E. be the end of Gays?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   
I only saw this touched on a little bit, but I think a factor in the decision to remove the potential for being homosexual through G.E. might depend on the attitude of society in general at the time.

I'm not sure if I can explain this well, but I guess I am looking at the question from the perspective of being a parent. As a parent, I want the very best in life for my child. I want my child to have the best chance at happiness possible. If society is still at a point where homosexuals have to be in fear for their safety from those who would harm them because of their own phobia, do I, as a parent, want to make a choice for my child that will remove that possibility? Knowing how cruel kids can be to each other for any and every little difference, given the ability to remove one thing that can be used to cause emotional distress and trauma to my child, would I?

I have a lot of gay friends and my sister-in-law is a lesbian. At various times conversation has turned to how hard it was growing up and how scary life is sometimes. Given the opportunity, as a parent, to prevent my child from feeling that pain, and taking the beatings, and fearing for their safety, would I make the choice to genetically engineer them to not be homosexual?

It would come down to society. If society is the same when this G.E. becomes a reality as it is now, I would make the choice to remove the possibility for homosexuality from my child. Not because I am selfish, or homophobic, or a bad person, but because I want everything good for my child, I want them to lead the happiest life that I can give them. I want my child not to have one more reason to fear bullies and teasing. I want my child to not be a target of someone's phobia that might end in my child's death. It would be a choice made because, as a mom, I never want to see my child hurting - physically or emotionally.

Hopefully I was able to explain my thought clearly, despite my wordiness and rambling.

Take care,
Cindi




posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by THX-1138
 



I've noticed that the homosexuals are always the least attractive members of society.


Really? Always? You need to get around more, methinks... Sexual orientation has nothing to do with looks.


Their own language details it... the women are butch, the men are fairy.


Again, really? Now I'll admit, there are some gay men and women who delight in playing up the stereotype, mostly to get just the reaction you're giving now... For the most part, you probably interact with many homosexuals in your daily life and don't even, and will never even, notice. Homosexuals aren't just about their orientation, and no amount of stereotyping will make it so.


Genetic engineering is most likely an attempt to perfect the human form.
We don't need more ugly and malformed people. We need more perfect people.


Someone earlier asked, it was Weedwacker, who are you to decide that? Perfect? What's that? Perfect human form? What's that? Every group of people on Earth have their own ideas of what constitutes perfection.

It's those very imperfections and our daily battles to overcome them that makes us human...genetic engineering may one day provide us with the "perfect" human body, but at what cost to our spirit?



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Glencairn
 




It would come down to society. If society is the same when this G.E. becomes a reality as it is now, I would make the choice to remove the possibility for homosexuality from my child. Not because I am selfish, or homophobic, or a bad person, but because I want everything good for my child, I want them to lead the happiest life that I can give them. I want my child not to have one more reason to fear bullies and teasing. I want my child to not be a target of someone's phobia that might end in my child's death. It would be a choice made because, as a mom, I never want to see my child hurting - physically or emotionally.


Better hope to God then that if you did that, that your now 'perfect and happy' heterosexual child if a daughter, did not end up with some heterosexual male who put her life in danger, or physically beat her to within an inch of her life. Statistics would show this would be quite possible. Or that she was the victim of an emotionally controlling person and her entire life was a complete misery.
I don't know where anyone gets off on assuming that heterosexuals are perfect, attractive and oh so happy. Just take a look at the world, the evidence speaks for itself.
Let's hope also that your grandchildren were also not abused by your heterosexual daughter's partner as child abuse is mainly a heterosexual deviance. Or would your perfect no harm world have to take out the aggression gene, the controlling inadequate gene, the sexual abuse gene, the male superiority gene?
Oh, and just how would your child be protected from bullying and teasing...I suppose that all kids are only bullied because of suspected homosexuality...lol
Take a look at the world and see who is war mongering, killing and causing the problems that make life unsafe.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


Did you even read my post at all? Really? What, for the love of all things chocolate, could you possibly find in my post that had a single thing to do with even one word of what you typed? Nothing? That's what I thought.

Of course I want my child to have a happy life, if I had the choice to take every single possible thing on earth away that could hurt my daughter, I'd definitely consider it. That doesn't mean that it would be the right thing to do, or that it wouldn't infringe on others, but I sure as heck would be entertaining the thought. It isn't realistic to do, and like I said, it likely wouldn't be the right thing to do, but I'm not going to lie and say the thought wouldn't cross my mind just to make you happy with my answer. Beyond that, my answer had nothing to do with making a "perfect" child, it was all about why I would do anything within my power to ensure my child the smoothest life possible.

Frankly, I don't even get where your aggression and antagonism stems from. You are SO far out in the middle of nowhere in regard to what I expressed that I am at a loss to figure out where you are even coming from. Look, sorry if you were abused and have issues with men now, I really am, I spent plenty of my own years being abused, but it just isn't relevant to the question at hand.

Take care,
Cindi



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Glencairn
 



Frankly, I don't even get where your aggression and antagonism stems from. You are SO far out in the middle of nowhere in regard to what I expressed that I am at a loss to figure out where you are even coming from. Look, sorry if you were abused and have issues with men now, I really am, I spent plenty of my own years being abused, but it just isn't relevant to the question at hand.


So anyone differing from your view is aggressive and antagonistic...interesting. If you do not understand how what I said relates to your post then I cannot really help you.
And to make some personal assumption about me is silly in the extreme, let alone offensive.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


You're right, it was rude and uncalled for. Please accept my apology. I think you were aggressive, not because I disagree with you, but because your post comes across as antagonistic and aggressive to me. If it wasn't meant to be, my apologies, again, for misinterpreting. It had nothing to do with agreeing or not. Frankly, in general, I usually do agree with and enjoy your posts.

I still don't understand where you got what you posted out of my own post. I don't understand the relevance between hoping that my daughter doesn't marry an abuser and the question that I answered. Of course I hope that she doesn't marry an abuser. My opinion is shaped from being a parent first and that was it. Not from a place of thinking that being a gay or lesbian is wrong or bad, but being told how hard growing up was for the homosexual friends and family that I have. I don't wish a hard and hurtful childhood on anybody. As a parent, given the ability to choose something that might be one less target for people to use to hurt my child, I want what will cause my child less hurt. I don't claim that it would give my child a "perfect" life or take away everything else that kids pick at each other over.

Society, right now today, was what I used as a measure for my answer. Today we hear about homosexuals being denied rights and being hurt or killed. Why would I not want to minimize the potential for that to happen to my child given the ability and choice? I don't think it is right that it happens, but it is reality right now and certainly not something that I would choose for my child.

Maybe I'm just not explaining myself well enough, it wouldn't be the first time, but basically, it isn't about creating a "perfect" child, it is about what I would consider that might offer a smoother road for my child to travel if society remains as it is now.

Take care,
Cindi



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Glencairn
 


Thank you for your apology, that was very gracious. I can see where you are coming from, but just feel it is wrong. People with ginger hair often have miserable childhoods because of that and can be taunted mercilessly. People who are a little too short, a little too fat, or have a lisp, stutter, or just have the wrong look...or any number of things have unhappy times because of the intolerance of others. People who have dysfunctional parents have unhappy childhoods. So where would the tampering stop?
The problem that homosexuals face is not because of who they are, or what they do, it is because of societies attitude and ignorance, which you acknowledge. Far better to attempt in some small way to just defy and educate those people who have those fearful thoughts than to tamper with nature and eradicate homosexuality.
It is interesting that often the children of homosexuals do not have the same prejudices and intolerance about others, and children who have had homosexuals around them from an early age have total acceptance. It is about education and tolerance of difference really.
Life can be seen on a purely physical level, or also on a spiritual level. On the spiritual level, maybe pain and difficulty is there for growth of that spirit, painful though that may be. A growth that would not have occurred with a comfortable life. Or, we are just animals. Either way I don't feel that messing with nature is in any way a good thing and can only lead to complete ruin.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Glencairn
Maybe I'm just not explaining myself well enough, it wouldn't be the first time, but basically, it isn't about creating a "perfect" child, it is about what I would consider that might offer a smoother road for my child to travel if society remains as it is now.


Sorry to jump in, but would it not be more worthwhile to promote those changes within society that would make being gay less of a burden? It can be as simple as contacting your reps and telling them you support gay marriage.

Societal change works...look at racial segregation, look at drinking and driving, look at smoking in restaurants and airplanes, etc. What unites these concepts is that over the course of a few years their perception and acceptance changed, across the board. But it starts with you.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


Okay, now I understand where you were coming from. I absolutely agree. I never claimed that my answer was logic based or the right thing to do. I know that it is an answer that is based firmly in emotion and not much else.

I hope that we improve in our treatment of others as a society, and agree that education and helping be a part of making life better is important. I'm lucky that I do have the friends that I have and the sis-in-law that I have. Spending time with my sis-in-law gives first hand experience to my kid that everyone is equal and that just because someone isn't exactly the same as she is, no one is worth more or less as a person. It is something that not all of society gets, unfortunately.

I don't think that genetic tampering is the answer to questions like this. I truly hadn't given the question much thought at all before this, really. I just know that I react to it from a place of emotion as a mom.

I know that adversity can be a cause for growth and strength. I completely believe that, but again, based on an emotional level. I mentioned being abused, but it led me to grow and to become much stronger than I think I would have otherwise. Not that I would wish that on anyone, but, for me, it was a source of experience to draw on that has allowed me to help others who had been in similar situations. Had I not gone through what I did because the "abuse" gene had been engineered out I would not be the person I am now. It is certainly a question that I have a hard time explaining my reasoning on when asked "given the chance would I go through it again?" (and you'd be surprised how many times I've been asked that), but I always say yes.

A girl who wrote in to some "story of the day" type newsletter that I subscribed to years ago was commenting on her feelings of wanting to end it because of a situation like mine. I wrote in to the newsletter and told them that I had been through a similar experience, offered info that verified my claim, and said that if they wanted to pass my email on to the commenter, I would love to talk to her. To my surprise they did and the girl emailed me. We became friends and she told me that she was prepared to kill herself that day (and gotten beyond just thinking about it) because every single counselor and therapist that she'd seen so far had never been abused themselves and couldn't truly relate to what she had felt. She just needed someone who "understood" on more than an academic level because she was hurting so badly. I knew EXACTLY what she meant. She was at a really lost point and needed someone to lean on who had been where she had and felt what she felt. I just offered an ear and answered what questions I could. Had I not gone through that, that email situation and similar encounters over the years, couldn't have happened. I like to think that I really did help and that she wasn't just blowing smoke up my hind end and I know that the bad that I went through to get there was what gave me the strength and understanding to help. I wouldn't change that. It shaped part of who I am. A comfortable life wouldn't have allowed me to be an understanding shoulder when someone needed that.

I agree that tampering with genetics gets into questions of where is the line, too. It is easy to see that from a logical perspective, I just think many would look it from an emotional perspective like I did.

Take care,
Cindi



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Of course it would, and I have added my voice in efforts to make a difference. I do what I can, I hope that others do as well. Frankly, I am one person and not going to change society as a whole with my one lone voice. I get what you are saying, but while I'm doing what I can I can't force all of society to see from my perspective. I can work to promote what I hope is a better society, but I'm also not blind to the reality of what currently is while I'm doing what I can.

Take care,
Cindi



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by TheTruthShallFreeYou
 


Autowrench:
There is not a doubt in my mind that this engineering will become possible in a few years. Truth is, even if we do this, we are not doing anything some alien beings have did on us before, so the "playing God" angle is moot. Again this is a Double Edged Sword. On the one hand, you could have a perfect child, with no genetic illness, just right in height and weight, not predisposed to smoke, or drink, or use drugs....then on the other hand, Super Soldiers, impervious to pain, weather, air quality, hunger, able to self repair using nano technology.

Universal Soldier
us.imdb.com...

Supersoldier (Wikipedia)
en.wikipedia.org...

The ‘nano-enhanced super soldier’
neurophilosophy.wordpress.com...

New Exoskeleton Gives Soldiers Super Strength
dsc.discovery.com...

Super Soldiers: Tomorrow's 'Army of One' Technology

Within three years, soldiers could begin testing futuristic devices that make them each "an army of one" by granting them unprecedented capabilities, such as the ability to see through walls thanks to advanced radar scopes and super-protection and super-strength conferred by high-tech armor.

www.informationliberation.com...

Remember, people, Science Fiction becomes Science, and it happens a lot faster than it used to. I would say by 2012 we will see some kind of Super Soldier waking about, along with mechanized weapons systems, and pilotless aircraft, controlled by a computer system that is in orbit.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
just my opinion , but :

i believe that the sections of society that are most vehemently opposed to homosexiality would be loathe to accept GE tampering with " gods creation "



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   
There also exists the potential to solve overpopulation problems by GE.
essentially GE the human bioform into a Non Sexual critter.

for example people might be given the choice between having just one child the old fashioned way, or as many of the New children they want, the News, being GE'd for disease resistance, extended lifespan, smarts etc.....

But also GE'd to be non sexual, and unable to reproduce as such.


I also suspect that a lot of the Function being sought via BCI's and neural implants, might eventually be reproduced biologically and without the need to implant hardware



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by STFUPPERCUTTER
 


Wow! Great contribution to this thread.
No, I am not a bigot, as my question could have been about ANY mental or physical attribute, and I chose this one due to personal relevance.
Cheers, and I will continue to read these other responses, which answer my question.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by OhZone
 



Weedwhacer, Why exactly do you find it chilling that I have compassion for people who are born with birth defects?


Firstly, who are YOU (or ANYONE for that matter) do decide what and what isn't a "birth defect"???

****obvious needs no explanation.

THAT is what I find chilling. Ever heard of "eugenics"???

****Yeah, I heard of eugenics....It has gotten a bad rap, by those who feel that they are inferior enough to sterilized.


I feel that it would be a kindness to prevent their birth.


EVEN WORSE statement! If you knew, for instance, beforehand that Lou Gehrig had a terminal illness, (ALS) and would "suffer" because of it, would you have preferred he not be born? Or, Dr. Stephen Hawking?

****For degenerative conditions that can be determined early in pregnancy....this is already being done. I believe Hawking had polio.
Not a birth defect.

If you can't see how WRONG your thinking is, then no one willl be able to explain it, I fear.

****Why am I wrong for having an opinion based on logic? It is emotionally based action that is always wrong. You said it your self there , "I fear."



...gay men have accepted themselves which is great, however there are may who do not. Some of them seek sex change operations.



NO! Misconception!

A pilot at my airline was 'infamous' for having the courage to have a sex-change operation. A former combat pilot in Vietnam. A straight man, who had a gender identity issue. After surgery, STILL sexually attracted to women.

****Apparently his gender ID issues were psycological. I knew a guy like that....he was molested by his uncle and liked it, so he played both ways.

There is no "cut and dried" definition, it can't be all neatly wrapped up with a bow on it.

Look at the controversy over that South African track runner recently. "SHE" could very well be completely 'female', with ovaries and a uterus and all...but her physique is sure manly! Is that her fault? NO!

****Women who take steroids lose a lot of theri femininity, and if they are large boned to start with, well....

Until you've walked in someone's shoes....


Until I've walked in someone else's shoes....well as we say, If I walk a mile in someone else's shoes, I'll be a mile away, and have his shoes,
and can say anything I like to say.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 06:46 PM
link   
i hope the link is relevant, pls move or delete post if not

www.timesonline.co.uk...

GE and attitudes towards it, particulary in the human species is going to be very interesting to say the least.



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by loner007

IF you dont think homosexuality can be nurtured then take a good look at the ancient spartans....


Yes good point. Male children were removed from their mothers as toddlers and reared and communed only with men to encourage their aggression to be fierce warriors. They were assigned adult "mentors" of sorts and it goes without saying what took place along with the military training. Homosexuality was encouraged and expected of them so yes it was nurtured. So it goes the Nazis also practiced this ideology to some extent.

Do I think homosexuality will be removed via GE? No because I think somewhere along the way human sexuality theories will change, in what way or who will gain by the new theories I don't know.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   
If you're afraid your child might become the subject of bullying and other forms of torment I don't think G.E. is for you, I think simply having no children is the best option.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 04:21 AM
link   
We are here for a reason. Why would the nazis want to change that? They want to depopulate the earth and we sure as hell can't populate it more, naturally that is.
I am a celibate lesbian actually. I wouldn't change that for the world, that is of course unless I met another woman that could appreciate who I am. But oh well. No, they cannot change our souls destiny. We all have to experience all of lifes experiences in order to understand life itself. Nothing is going to change that, it is not genetic, it is spiritual. Crazy nazis anyway.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join