If they could identify genes in the womb.....

[PatsSB42]

that predicted homosexuality, should mass destruction of them be allowed by bigoted parents?

[Pujo]

Originally Posted by PatsSB42

that predicted homosexuality, should mass destruction of them be allowed by bigoted parents?

I don't like the idea of gene-shopping at all (to select babies of a specific gender, height, etc).

[PatsSB42]

Originally Posted by Pujo

I don't like the idea of gene-shopping at all (to select babies of a specific gender, height, etc).

Agreed, but do you think it shuld be allowed, especally if it is kind of like a hate crime against race or sexual preference?

[Pujo]

Originally Posted by PatsSB42

Agreed, but do you think it shuld be allowed, especally if it is kind of like a hate crime against race or sexual preference?

Yes, I think it should be allowed. It's in line with how I feel about abortions: I'm opposed to them but believe they should be legal. If us pro-choicers are going to argue that an undeveloped fetus is not a human being, I don't see how destroying a fetus for any reason could be within the realm of hate-crime laws.

[Harry Boy]

Originally Posted by PatsSB42

that predicted homosexuality, should mass destruction of them be allowed by bigoted parents?

The Liberal Democratic way of doing it would be to leave it up to the Parents (FREEDOM) why would you call the parents "bigoted", maybe the parents would someday like to have grandchildren.

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by PatsSB42

Agreed, but do you think it shuld be allowed, especally if it is kind of like a hate crime against race or sexual preference?

If it's not a baby yet I guess people can kill it for any reason. Hate crimes don't count if they aren't comitted against people are they ?

[PF1996]

Originally Posted by PatsSB42

that predicted homosexuality, should mass destruction of them be allowed by bigoted parents?

This is such a stupid question that I'm curious to know why you asked it. It isn't relevant WHY a person chooses to have an abortion since the choice doesn't change the nature of the procedure for the vast majority of abortions. If a woman doesn't want to have a homosexual child, then she SHOULD destroy the mass of tissue before it develops into a person. Ditto for a woman who doesn't want a biracial child. Ditto for a woman who doesn't want a female/male child. Ditto for a woman who doesn't want a dumb child. Again..the reason really doesn't matter.

[patsfan13]

Not as far fetched as one would think:

As the culture wars rage over gay rights, a flock of sheep at Oregon State University may help answer a key question behind the controversy: Is homosexuality a matter of choice or biology?

The Corvallis herd includes a group of rams that scientists delicately refer to as "male-oriented." These animals consistently ignore females and bestow all their amorous attentions on members of their own sex.

Researcher Charles Roselli says a decade of study suggests sexual orientation is largely hard-wired into the sheep's brains before birth. Now, he's trying to figure out how that happens, zeroing in on genes and hormones. In a bold test of his ideas, he hopes to engineer the birth of gay rams by altering conditions in the womb.

Sheep aren't people, but the Oregon work adds to a growing body of research that bolsters biological explanations for sexual orientation across species — inclu

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...cience19m.html

[Pujo]

Geez, a biological basis for homosexuality? Who would have guessed that straight people don't have sex with others of the same sex as a "lifestyle choice"? That almost supports the crazy idea that gay people should have equal rights.