NationStates Jolt Archive

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

Definitions first:

Is homosexuality a disease?

Does homosexuality causes death or health problems in those affected by its "wake"?

I'd help form the Gay Brotherhood and attack Alcatraz Island and ...

Oh wait ...

Never mind.

Whatever people do with their brain chemistry is none of my business.

People wouldn't do it out of free will so much as the Churches and other people force it on them.

Definitions first:

Is homosexuality a disease?

Does homosexuality causes death or health problems in those affected by its "wake"?
They arn't calling it a disease, they're just saying that their drug can change it. This hypothetical drug also has no side effects.

mostly they don't want to be "cured".
if some of them do, I don't see ethical problem in "medicine" that will "cure them.

They arn't calling it a disease, they're just saying that their drug can change it. This hypothetical drug also has no side effects.

No side effects? You mean that dumping your friends and your lover is "no side effects"?

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

You should probably read some of the other "gay" threads before you ask this...

I don't know. The "cure" should be made available to people who want it. If they don't want it, then they don't get it. Also its kind of an ethical thing, to mess with someones brain, but thats a different story. I'm leaning more towards the "cure" is stupid, rather than: the "cure" is awesome (to put it blatantly).

They arn't calling it a disease, they're just saying that their drug can change it. This hypothetical drug also has no side effects.

Then the word cure is out of the issue. cures and medicines are for diseases. They have just discovered a drug that affects human behavior with no medical uses.

This may be nitpicking, but I'm assuming Lesbians would be perfectly fine in your world?

Otherwise, there's still that problem of legality, free will, et al...

people should learn to live with who they are,its society that has the problem not homosexuals.Perhaps we should instead seek to find a cure for homophobia?

Then the word cure is out of the issue. cures and medicines are for diseases. They have just discovered a drug that affects human behavior with no medical uses.
This is why I put the word "cure" in quotes every time I used it. These people who made it are calling it a cure. Whether or not it is a cure is another matter entirely.

Then the word cure is out of the issue. cures and medicines are for diseases. They have just discovered a drug that affects human behavior with no medical uses.
First rule of pharmaceutical marketing: Every drug has a disease. You just have to find it, and if you can't find it, then create one.

I don't see what's wrong with a "cure". It's not like we're losing anything.

No side effects? You mean that dumping your friends and your lover is "no side effects"?

Would this mean that there would then be 51 ways to leave your lover?

It's the "conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors" part that bothers me. And the word "cure," too. Call it a "change" rather than a "cure" and I might feel better about it. A little. Funny, though, how some people would support changing a person's brain chemistry to meet their view of how things ought to be, but get violently upset by people changing their brain chemistry to feel better after chemo treatments. O tempora, O mores (as that Italian feller once said).

This is why I put the word "cure" in quotes every time I used it. These people who made it are calling it a cure. Whether or not it is a cure is another matter entirely.

Yeah, I know. I am not attacking you, I am exposing my point over the issue. This forum is used for that, no?

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.
if there was a "cure", it shouldn't be welcomed. it's tampering with the law of Nature and we already have enough population problems as it is...

I would actively oppose the use of such drugs.

Anyone voluntarialy using such treatment would be doing so because of the prejudices of society and not because of some inate desire to be attracted to straight women.

I would also be concerned by the ethical problems caused during the development of such a treatment (human testing phase anyone?).

i dont think it should be available.

i find it very doubtful that anyone would want to change orientations for any reason other than outside pressure. thats a piss poor reason to change anyone's brain chemistry.

MAYBE if a person had to jump through the same hoops as a person who wants to get a sex change operation so that after a couple years of testing and living straight they might get approved for this drug.

This may be nitpicking, but I'm assuming Lesbians would be perfectly fine in your world?

Otherwise, there's still that problem of legality, free will, et al...
The "cure" also works on lesbians, or they have another drug that has the same effect.

Where do bisexuals fit into all this? Are they diseased? Does the cure have the same effects on them as on homosexuals?

The bisexuals get shot ;)

Where do bisexuals fit into all this? Are they diseased? Does the cure have the same effects on them as on homosexuals?
Bisexuals are first of all the people they used to make the drug, and second of all, also affected by it.

The bisexuals get shot ;)
Sucks to be them. :p

Sucks to be them. :p


*throws protective screen around Deep Kimchi*

Touche pas mon copain!

*throws protective screen around Deep Kimchi*

Touche pas mon copain!
Je vais vous tuer!!!

*throws protective screen around Deep Kimchi*

Touche pas mon copain!
Je vais vous tuer!!!

*throws protective screen around Deep Kimchi*

Touche pas mon copain!
Je vais vous tuer!!!

Sucks to be them. :p
Good thing I have my own firearms.

Whatever people do with their brain chemistry is none of my business.

Yeah. Buuuuuut....people would end up being forced or pressured into taking it...

Je vais vous tuer!!!

Tellement violence!

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

I would hate the concept of it, its mere existence, you could say, because all it would do is put yet another, final stigma on homosexuality.

At the same time, if there really were anything like that, I couldn't very well fault the people who chose to use it. I would *hope* that people wouldn't feel the need to use it, but if somebody felt terrible with himself because of an unaccepting society around them, who am I to tell them to simply suck it up for the greater good?

:(

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5120004.stm

IF the scientists in that study are correct, then the propensity for homosexuality could be stifled in the womb as well - I'm sure that a deliberate adjustment of the womb environment (provided that they discover exactly what) would prevent the child from being born homosexual (or bisexual).

How many parents do you think would opt for the "insurance" that their child would not be homosexual?

Even worse than the hypothetical drug the OP is talking about - here the fetus doesn't get a choice.

I would bet that most parents would opt for the insurance.

(not that I would)

No side effects? You mean that dumping your friends and your lover is "no side effects"?

Why dump your friends?

Yeah. Buuuuuut....people would end up being forced or pressured into taking it...

Damned peer pressured drug users

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

My reaction would be the same as if somebody announced a "cure" for musical ability, for shy personality, for left-handedness, or for optimism. If there are people who are so consumed with self-loathing that they would try to "cure" themselves of their personality, then I would be much more interested in learning why those people hate themselves so much, and why they feel that they need to be "cured" of themselves.

Why dump your friends?
If the drug makes you un-gay, you may not be as much fun on road trips as you were before.

The drug sounds stupid. I can't see why many adults would use it, but I can see that a lot of kids would be forced to take it by their parents.

Its much like abortion, it should be a free choice. Some will want it, some don't.

If the drug makes you un-gay, you may not be as much fun on road trips as you were before.

The drug sounds stupid. I can't see why many adults would use it, but I can see that a lot of kids would be forced to take it by their parents.

Gays and non gays cant accept one another on road trips?

Gays and non gays cant accept one another on road trips?

Accepting means receiving to me.

Would this drug be a one shot change or a lifetime of eating a pill once a week?

Would taking a small dose make a gay person bisexual?

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.


I think about this quite a lot, okay not really in conection with homosexulality but I guess it comes under the same thing.

So if we had a pill to cure all sorts of defects easpecily of the mind, I.E. if we could all pop a pill and not be racist, or homophobic, or Christian, or whatever, would we do it, and would it be a good idea?

The big question that pops into my mind is, who gets to deciede what is normal then?

Yeah. Buuuuuut....people would end up being forced or pressured into taking it...
Well, people try to make you do all kinds of things all day, one doesn't end up doing them. Besides, there'll probably be a way to revert back. And the government will be looking for drugs to make everybody good little citizens. To use on foreigners, of course.

Will there also be a market for a drug to make people gay?

Will there also be a market for a drug to make people gay?
It stands to reason...

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

I would not be against the existence, but would be opposed to anyone being forced to take it; and the option should only be available to adults (not for the gay teenager). As far as I am concerned those people are free to do with their lifes as they wish on this front; if they wish to remain gay - kudos to them, if they wish to be straight - again kudos to them.

I do however wonder how the cure would affect the bisexual population ?

I do however wonder how the cure would affect the bisexual population ?

Could go either way I suppose.

No side effects? You mean that dumping your friends and your lover is "no side effects"?

O.o Why would you dump your friends just because you took a drug that made you hetrosexual, who even says your friends would be gay anyway? Just a thought. <3

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

So what if a gay person produces a version to do the opposite - make people gay? :p

O.o Why would you dump your friends just because you took a drug that made you hetrosexual, who even says your friends would be gay anyway? Just a thought. <3

You don't get around much, do you?

Tellement violence!


Mais ici, on est fou, ouai?

So what if a gay person produces a version to do the opposite - make people gay? :p


It's okay if they make me laugh!

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

Can you cure heterosexuality too?

Can you cure heterosexuality too?

Er.. yeah. In the sense that you can cure breathing. Don't try this at home.

Er.. yeah. In the sense that you can cure breathing. Don't try this at home.

Where should I try it, then?

Can you cure heterosexuality too?

And sexuality itself ? I am sure some people would be willing to take drugs that take away the distraction (or traumatic memories) of being attracted to others.

Where should I try it, then?
In the sea with a rock tied around your neck. That's how you cure heterosexuality. :p

Where should I try it, then?
Overpass.

Ok here is what i think. I think this drug is ok if the user is willing to use it. As long as there is no side effects. But then again we have an example of someone in real liffe that changed them self to fit the "norm". Michael Jackson, did something like this. He turned from black to white. So thats my only thing about the pill that bugs me.
And one other thing, heterosexuality doesn't need a cure cause that is "the" natural thing. If someone made everybody gay then there would be no way to reproduce, and then the human race would pretty much die.

Where should I try it, then?


Under conditions of extreme safety + psychatric help, such as in a better NHS Psychiatric Ward.

Can I !please! present you with the telephone number for the Samaritans?

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.
I would probably end up being Magneto's equivalent and lead all gays and lesbians in a crusade to destroy the damn thing.

Like some signs in the movie said "We don't need no stinkin cure" and "We're here to stay".

There is no inherent problem with being gay. The problems come from the intolerance of society. So an hypothetical cure for homosexuality would only end up treating the symptoms, not the cause of the evil.

Under conditions of extreme safety + psychatric help, such as in a better NHS Psychiatric Ward.

Can I !please! present you with the telephone number for the Samaritans?

Hey, I didn't suppress my natural tendencies during my last 72-hour observation period for nothing!

Straitjackets chafe. :(

But then again we have an example of someone in real liffe that changed them self to fit the "norm". Michael Jackson, did something like this. He turned from black to white. So thats my only thing about the pill that bugs me.
Yeah, Michael Jackson was trying to fit the norm... erm, suure, I guess white people have no noses.

I would probably end up being Magneto's equivalent and lead all gays and lesbians in a crusade to destroy the damn thing.

Like some signs in the movie said "We don't need no stinkin cure" and "We're here to stay".

There is no inherent problem with being gay. The problems come from the intolerance of society. So an hypothetical cure for homosexuality would only end up treating the symptoms, not the cause of the evil.

While I agree with you, I feel that it will not be possible to stop parents from using it on their children.

The number of gay and bisexual people in certain countries would plummet.

Cure?? CURE?? You MUST be joking.

I don't see why any self-respecting person who has different views would even consider taking a "cure" in the first place. Homosexuality isn't a disease, there is no true "Cure" that can be found.

Besides, the only people that would take it would be those pressured into doing so. Because society, while we say we're accepting of certain things, we still pressure people into going away from those ideals. It happens with religion, it happens with sexual orientation. It's sickening, pathetic, and I think everyone who tries to change the way people are should be ashamed of themselves for even THINKING of going in that direction in the first place.

People are the way they are for a reason. Just because I happen to be attracted to guys AND girls doesn't mean something is wrong with me. It's just who I am, it's the feeling in the soul that tells me THIS is the right choice for me.

But to try to change that...to try to tell people "No, you can't be this, because it's wrong." that's just in itself, wrong. To tell people "Oh yeah here you go, it's a drug that'll change your views on life. You won't like the same gender and you might be regretting it when you take it, but oh well! You'll be normal! Just like everyone else!" That's just sad.

What's next? Religion drugs? For those poor confused souls out there who don't want a religion, or go to a certain one...are you going to start talking about drugs to make people christians or buddhists?

There are some things in this world you shouldn't tamper with. And the workings of the heart is one of them.

Not that I'd support this sort of thing, but I think that perhaps our discussion about whether or not the medical treatment is or isn't a cure is not the point. The cure of mutantcy in X-Men has a similar question attached to it - is this really a cure if there's not really a natural disease to repair - and it's a loaded question at that. If you were to ask the corrent right-wing fundamentalist, they would tell you that homosexuality is very much a disease of the mind, similar to depression. If the person was more politically minded, they might suggest that homosexuality isn't a disease, but a choice.

These points could generate massive amounts of angry debate, and they do not contain the posed question. If there were a cure created, how would we, as people and as a greater society, react?

And what about this: In X-Men, the cure was weaponized, to allow military figures to deliver the cure to targets without their consent. How would it affect your, and everyone else's reactions, if select people were given a gun that could suddenly make you un-gay? Would that change how the cure was accepted?

[Note: There isn't, nor should there ever be a way to change the fundamental character of a person. This is not the question of the debate. The question IS how would people react if this change in character, which some people in our world still find to be an unnatural and detrimental "condition," could suddenly be cured.]

While I agree with you, I feel that it will not be possible to stop parents from using it on their children.

The number of gay and bisexual people in certain countries would plummet.
It would be possible if we managed to destroy the factory producing the cure AND suppress all data concerning this project.

Taking into account that there are gays and lesbian in the armed forces/secret services, and that others might be excellent hackers, combined with my evil genius, I think it could be achieved quite easily.

Can you cure heterosexuality too?

Yes it is called marriage. Turns sex drive down to near zero.

In X-Men, the cure was weaponized, to allow military figures to deliver the cure to targets without their consent. How would it affect your, and everyone else's reactions, if select people were given a gun that could suddenly make you un-gay? Would that change how the cure was accepted?
Again, I would go all Magneto on their ass. And, like Magneto, my gayness is so powerful that even their pitiful weapons could never destroy it completely... Even if they managed to get me, someday I'd be back for them!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! :D

Again, I would go all Magneto on their ass. And, like Magneto, my gayness is so powerful that even their pitiful weapons could never destroy it completely... Even if they managed to get me, someday I'd be back for them!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! :D

Either that, or you end up like that guy in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest...

You can already alter brain chemistry, through brainwave generators, subliminal messaging, meditation and so much more. But are all the homosexuals gone? No.

Very little people would take the 'cure'.
And its a waste of money and research.

If I was a homosexual, I would be proud, and would never turn.

It would be possible if we managed to destroy the factory producing the cure AND suppress all data concerning this project.

Taking into account that there are gays and lesbian in the armed forces/secret services, and that others might be excellent hackers, combined with my evil genius, I think it could be achieved quite easily.

You might call your group GMAC

Gays militantly against choice.

How is homosexuality a disease of the mind like depression?

Love is never a disease.

While I agree with you, I feel that it will not be possible to stop parents from using it on their children.

Making it illegal to be administered to minors will go a long way. Especially if violation of that law results in the death penalty.

I do however admit the philosophy behind this cure bothers me a bit. Basicly it states: homosexuality is not normal, and being normal is better than not normal. However, having a superior intellect is not normal either. Nor are children that really like to go to school, people having an esoteric taste in music etc. In other words: being special or different is not necessarily a bad thing.

Still, if the person him/herself *wants* the cure - let them.

You might call your group GMAC

Gays militantly against choice.
To be weak and succumb to societal pressure to conform, destroying a huge part of who you are in the process, is not a choice.

Dude, keep in mind I'm Magneto here. I've got to come off with a least mild villain vibes.

Not that I'd support this sort of thing, but I think that perhaps our discussion about whether or not the medical treatment is or isn't a cure is not the point. The cure of mutantcy in X-Men has a similar question attached to it - is this really a cure if there's not really a natural disease to repair - and it's a loaded question at that. If you were to ask the corrent right-wing fundamentalist, they would tell you that homosexuality is very much a disease of the mind, similar to depression. If the person was more politically minded, they might suggest that homosexuality isn't a disease, but a choice.

These points could generate massive amounts of angry debate, and they do not contain the posed question. If there were a cure created, how would we, as people and as a greater society, react?

And what about this: In X-Men, the cure was weaponized, to allow military figures to deliver the cure to targets without their consent. How would it affect your, and everyone else's reactions, if select people were given a gun that could suddenly make you un-gay? Would that change how the cure was accepted?

[Note: There isn't, nor should there ever be a way to change the fundamental character of a person. This is not the question of the debate. The question IS how would people react if this change in character, which some people in our world still find to be an unnatural and detrimental "condition," could suddenly be cured.]

I don't understand why people are even bringing Xmen 3 into this, this is a serious discussion here, and we're talking about a movie that was pure fiction to say the least.

The only reason they were put into the weapons was a precaution in case the mutants Magneto and Mystique (and any of his other followers) showed up, because they decided the best way to capture, would be to turn him into a human. Then, when he got followers and started his war, the cure was placed into all sorts of weapons, but if you noticed, it was still because the mutant army of Magneto's.

But if you notice, that has absolutely no point, because Magneto was already rebelling anyways to destroy all humans so mutants would rule, and the cure was just another way.

Now off that note, I don't see a huge issue of the homosexuals planning to kill off the heterosexuals so they can be dominant. Because heterosexual couples are needed to keep the human race going.

But my point is, even though the movie was fiction, the only reason they made the cure into the guns was because Magneto and his followers were rebelling. Sure, if and when this so-called cure is made, of course there will be protesters.

My point I'm trying to make is that they made it in the weapons because Magneto was already trying to kill off the human race. He was already a danger to begin with, and the cure in the weapons was a precaution. I don't see any one human destroying another because they want to kill off the heterosexual race.

A marvelous concept, one that is too science fiction to ever occur, sadly. However in response to your questions...

The existance of such a cure would not be wrong, quite the contrary it would be the mark of society attempting to salvage some of the values that have carried us so far. Would I protest it? I think not, I would donate toward the project as much as I could... and the people that would go to get it would be deserving of praise.

And yes, it is a disease. It prevents you from passing on your genes to the next generation of people (thankfully, in some respects)... much the same as sterilization, but a choice... or even not? And because the meaning of any living thing's existance is to reproduce, a brain... condition which disallows that must be nothing more than a disease... a defect, or a deformity.

I would make the administration of such a drug mandated by law, if only to further preserve precious social values that have been failing for the past 10 or 20 years. Then we just need a pill for liberalism, and we're all set.

Hahaha... maybe someday.

- Eskertania

In response to Eskertania's post:

I don't understand how loving one of the same gender is a disease.

Sure, you aren't passing your genes on to another, but hey, look at it this way. There's a lot of heterosexual couples out there that don't do that either! Are they still diseased even though they're straight?

Besides, look at it this way. There are millions of children out there that need parents. And usually, heterosexual couples won't adopt, because most would rather have one of their own.

BUT, lucky lucky, since Homosexual couples can't reproduce one of their own, guess what's first on most of their minds? Adoption.

And yes, it is a disease. It prevents you from passing on your genes to the next generation of people (thankfully, in some respects)... much the same as sterilization, but a choice... or even not? And because the meaning of any living thing's existance is to reproduce, a brain... condition which disallows that must be nothing more than a disease... a defect, or a deformity.

So.. considering he did not wish to reproduce, Jesus was suffering from a disease, defect or deformity ?

As a sidenote: if thanks to you your siblings are far more succesful in reproduction than they would have been normally, you would still have succeeded in spreading your genetic pattern - even without repoducing yourself.

The existance of such a cure would not be wrong, quite the contrary it would be the mark of society attempting to salvage some of the values that have carried us so far. Would I protest it? I think not, I would donate toward the project as much as I could... and the people that would go to get it would be deserving of praise.

Homophobe.

And yes, it is a disease. It prevents you from passing on your genes to the next generation of people (thankfully, in some respects)... much the same as sterilization, but a choice... or even not? And because the meaning of any living thing's existance is to reproduce, a brain... condition which disallows that must be nothing more than a disease... a defect, or a deformity.

Bullshit. No psychiatrist or psychologist association in the world still think it's a disease. It's been barred from the list for at least 30 years.

Moreover, being gay does not mean you're sterile. Gay men and Lesbian women can and DO have children on a frequent basis.

The meaning of any thing's existance is not to reproduce. Humans can accomplish things far more meaningful than just fucking like rabbits to produce offsprings.


I would make the administration of such a drug mandated by law, if only to further preserve precious social values that have been failing for the past 10 or 20 years. Then we just need a pill for liberalism, and we're all set.

Hahaha... maybe someday.

- Eskertania
Again, homophobe.

We already accept that some people are so unsatisfied with who they are that they undergo surgery to reassign their physical gender.

Why is there no uproar from the gay community regarding the transgendered? The gay community has traditionally been the most accepting of people that make such a change to themselves.
This is quite similar, rather than altering the outward gender to match what the brain believes, this alters the brain.

I know gay people that would never dream of taking this path, but then I know gay people that tried desparately for years to learn to be attracted to the opposite gender and made themselves miserable because they could not accept who they were.

Choice should be the option, with no one taking it away or forcing it on anyone.

A marvelous concept, one that is too science fiction to ever occur, sadly. However in response to your questions...

The existance of such a cure would not be wrong, quite the contrary it would be the mark of society attempting to salvage some of the values that have carried us so far. Would I protest it? I think not, I would donate toward the project as much as I could... and the people that would go to get it would be deserving of praise.

And yes, it is a disease. It prevents you from passing on your genes to the next generation of people (thankfully, in some respects)... much the same as sterilization, but a choice... or even not? And because the meaning of any living thing's existance is to reproduce, a brain... condition which disallows that must be nothing more than a disease... a defect, or a deformity.

I would make the administration of such a drug mandated by law, if only to further preserve precious social values that have been failing for the past 10 or 20 years. Then we just need a pill for liberalism, and we're all set.

Hahaha... maybe someday.

- Eskertania

I'm sure your wife/cousin would be proud of that staunch defence of "family values" and Eugenics..

This is quite similar, rather than altering the outward gender to match what the brain believes, this alters the brain.

Yes, and they used to call leucotomy neurosurgery.

A marvelous concept, one that is too science fiction to ever occur, sadly. However in response to your questions...

The existance of such a cure would not be wrong, quite the contrary it would be the mark of society attempting to salvage some of the values that have carried us so far. Would I protest it? I think not, I would donate toward the project as much as I could... and the people that would go to get it would be deserving of praise.


Yes, I can see it now:

"I'm so proud of you! You're just like every single other person in the world! Sure, you lost one of the things that made you who you are, and you'll probably be a completely different person....BUT WHO CARES! YOU'RE STRAIGHT! Oh, you're so close to being just like every other person who can't think for themselves and have to hide behind the marvelous cliche of societal norms! Why, pretty soon you'll be shouting that you want the whites to rule the world and destroy the other races! And who knows? Maybe you'll even work hard, and become a corporate slave who turns around and does this to your children in the future!!!"

Yes, I can see it now:

"I'm so proud of you! You're just like every single other person in the world! Sure, you lost one of the things that made you who you are, and you'll probably be a completely different person....BUT WHO CARES! YOU'RE STRAIGHT! Oh, you're so close to being just like every other person who can't think for themselves and have to hide behind the marvelous cliche of societal norms! Why, pretty soon you'll be shouting that you want the whites to rule the world and destroy the other races! And who knows? Maybe you'll even work hard, and become a corporate slave who turns around and does this to your children in the future!!!"

Now, that's the American Dream in action... *sigh*

unfortunately. Have a wife, kids, and a high paying job, that's the "American" dream.

But that's not my dream. My dream is to go out with whoever I choose, guy or girl, adopt a child or two, and become a teacher so I can teach kids that it's ok to be yourself no matter what others tell you, as well as other important values.

Personally, I'm sick of how society is nowadays, because people would rather go with majority, instead of thinking for themselves and forming their own opinions. People tell me to grow up? At least I'd rather flaunt my individuality and be my own person, instead of being just like everyone else.

And the government will be looking for drugs to make everybody good little citizens.


They already have this. It's called public school. For the really tough cases they add a dose of Ritalin.

I have to disagree Shoo. While I hated school when I was in it, education IS a really important thing to have. Hell, I'd rather be knowledgable about what I'm arguing about than spouting off on a tangent with nothing to back me up. And I wouldn't be able to do that if I never went to school.

Sure, there's drama involved, but that's life unfortunately.

I'd help form the Gay Brotherhood and attack Alcatraz Island and ...

Oh wait ...

Never mind.awww... I was wondering what Maggie da Neto would do with that chess piece at the end... :p

on a more serious note, the exsistance of such a drug is not the problem it's what is done with the drug that is.

can you imagine Parents sneaking that drug into their child's food and drink?

Either that, or you end up like that guy in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest...

Which one? The guy who wasn't crazy, or the 20 that were?

awww... I was wondering what Maggie da Neto would do with that chess piece at the end... :p

on a more serious note, the exsistance of such a drug is not the problem it's what is done with the drug that is.

can you imagine Parents sneaking that drug into their child's food and drink?

depends on what the drug is really. If it's taken by injection, you can't very well sneak a syringe into a kid's food and drink...unless the kid was incredibly stupid and didn't notice things like that XD

depends on what the drug is really. If it's taken by injection, you can't very well sneak a syringe into a kid's food and drink...unless the kid was incredibly stupid and didn't notice things like that XDtrue dat, however, it's not known if injection is the only way. will it be perscription only? administered only by a Dr. or will it be made commercially, a pill or a one dose liquid?

I have to disagree Shoo. While I hated school when I was in it, education IS a really important thing to have. Hell, I'd rather be knowledgable about what I'm arguing about than spouting off on a tangent with nothing to back me up. And I wouldn't be able to do that if I never went to school.

Sure, there's drama involved, but that's life unfortunately.

I think you missed my point. Education is essential to personal success. Public education is essential to the creation of mindless drones.

how so? I've been to public school my entire life, and I'm not a mindless drone. Actually, it's helped me become a better person really...

I want to say in advance that I am not implying any political goal in this post, I am simply bringing up an idea for discussion and debate. Please do not attack me.
Also, I want to say that yes, I did get the idea from the last X-men movie.

Lets say that tomorrow, a company announces to the world that they have developed a "Cure" for homosexuality. They then show that the damn thing actually works, and changes a person's brain chemistry in such a way that they are no longer attracted to men, and instead are attracted to women. Conservative churches begin funnelling gay teenagers to doctors who administer this "cure" while other people, whether out of religious conviction, or just to fit in and have a "normal" life, go to be "cured" as well.

Would the existence of this "cure" be wrong? would you protest it, or even act to destroy it? And what would you think of the people who went in to get it.

Sorry, is homosexuality now officially a disease? I know the Pentagon rather foolishly said that it was, but honestly, for there to be a cure for homosexuality, first it has to be a disease.

Besides, inventing a "cure" for it implies that there is something wrong with it - which there isn't. Homosexuality is perfectly natural.

A marvelous concept, one that is too science fiction to ever occur, sadly. However in response to your questions...

The existance of such a cure would not be wrong, quite the contrary it would be the mark of society attempting to salvage some of the values that have carried us so far. Would I protest it? I think not, I would donate toward the project as much as I could... and the people that would go to get it would be deserving of praise.

And yes, it is a disease. It prevents you from passing on your genes to the next generation of people (thankfully, in some respects)... much the same as sterilization, but a choice... or even not? And because the meaning of any living thing's existance is to reproduce, a brain... condition which disallows that must be nothing more than a disease... a defect, or a deformity.

I would make the administration of such a drug mandated by law, if only to further preserve precious social values that have been failing for the past 10 or 20 years. Then we just need a pill for liberalism, and we're all set.

Hahaha... maybe someday.

- Eskertania

How so? Just because a person is gay doesn't mean they can't have children. There is such a thing as artificial insemination, where...actually, I won't go into it.

And anyway, are you saying that because I don't want children I have a disease? Let me put it into these terms - I do not want children enough that I will prevent myself having any, thus preventing my genes being passed onto the next generation?

Everyone, beware me, I HAVE A DISEASE!!!!

I would probably end up being Magneto's equivalent and lead all gays and lesbians in a crusade to destroy the damn thing.

Like some signs in the movie said "We don't need no stinkin cure" and "We're here to stay".

[]bThere is no inherent problem with being gay. The problems come from the intolerance of society. So an hypothetical cure for homosexuality would only end up treating the symptoms, not the cause of the evil.[/b]

BRAVA!!!!

At last!

We must cure the gays before they use their magnet powers against us!

I think you missed my point. Education is essential to personal success. Public education is essential to the creation of mindless drones.

:D Let me guess. Homeschooling?

I think you missed my point. Education is essential to personal success. Public education is essential to the creation of mindless drones.
Yeah, because making education available to all people is the best way to ensure they're mindless obedient drones. It would be much better to make sure that only the wealthy have the time and resources to educate their offspring, because being locked in perpetual ignorance will help the underclasses discover their individuality.

Or something.

Folks, the OP used the word "cure" not out of bigotry, but because the same word was used in the X-Men movie...

That said, I wouldn't care if such a cure were sold for those that, being homosexual and belonging to extreme-right-wing societies, wanted not to be targeted by their prejudice. What WOULD concern me is that conservatives would want to make usage of this drug mandatory... If that happened, even I, a straight man, would join the Magneto of the battle.

At last!

We must cure the gays before they use their magnet powers against us!
Aaaaeeeee!!! *throws ninja star into back, runs away*

Folks, the OP used the word "cure" not out of bigotry, but because the same word was used in the X-Men movie...

That said, I wouldn't care if such a cure were sold for those that, being homosexual and belonging to extreme-right-wing societies, wanted not to be targeted by their prejudice. What WOULD concern me is that conservatives would want to make usage of this drug mandatory... If that happened, even I, a straight man, would join the Magneto of the battle.
Ah-ha, so I can add a non-gay to our list of personnel then? Very well...

*notes name*

Folks, the OP used the word "cure" not out of bigotry, but because the same word was used in the X-Men movie...

That said, I wouldn't care if such a cure were sold for those that, being homosexual and belonging to extreme-right-wing societies, wanted not to be targeted by their prejudice. What WOULD concern me is that conservatives would want to make usage of this drug mandatory... If that happened, even I, a straight man, would join the Magneto of the battle.

Count me in as well.

if a cure IS made and made manditory, then yes, I would definately join the fight against it. Seriously, I'm against the idea of a "cure," but I'm even more against MAKING people take it even if they don't want to, because people have the freedom to make whatever choice they want, and to take that away, especially over such little a thing, is wrong.

But here's what really irritates me. People are treating homosexuality as if that's the main thing a person is. When in fact, homosexuality describes the littlest of a person.

What people should need to know about a person is simple.

"Hi, I'm Max, I'm 19, and I want to be a teacher. I'm going to college right now to get my degree. I like to play the drums, ocarina, and I write in confidence that some day, I can become a sucessful author."

Even that sentence could be cut down, because sometimes even a person doesn't need to know some of that stuff. But if a person is a homosexual, that should be treated like a person's love life: Sacred, and left alone by everyone else.

Hell, we're becoming increasingly tolerant on religion, but on homosexuality, we can't even get far enough without someone being an idiot and making stupid comments. The whole Gay Marriage banning issue being one of them.

I mean seriously, what's wrong with two guys/two girls who want to get married in a church? WHAT are people so afraid of? Sure, it goes against the definition of what marriage is, but hello? Definitions can EASILY be changed. Hell, look at words like Cool, and Hot. It didn't take that long for cool to mean cold, and then add the meaning of someone who has a personality that you like. And it certainly didn't take long for us to add a definition to hot, so instead of just a very high temperature, it also means someone who you find really good looking.

Anyways, that's all I can say for now until more comments arise :)

My cousin is gay. I found this out a few years ago and I don't care! I was perfectly content knowing then and now that he looks like Jude Law, does people's hair, and went to the same high school that I do. He's happy with his boyfreind. They wear rings, although they aren't married, and travel the world together, as his boyfreind writes for a travel magazine.

I imagine they would be uncomfortalbe being the only homosexuals out there. So when they are already a minority, why push them down even further? Why don't we just brainwash and convert all people of other religions? Why don't we make everyone white? Isn't that the same concept this "cure" would push? I would fight such a cure because no matter how you look at it, it's wrong.

As previously mentioned, why don't we just cure homophobia?

As previously mentioned, why don't we just cure homophobia?

I agree completely.

Being gay is a right, not a privelege, we are all bisexual, and there is a wide specrum of genders, no one is really all ubermale or all uberfemale. My unionized public school teacher told me this, so I believe it. (My parents disagree, but they are always telling me what to do so I don't listen to them.) So, offering any "cure" is just like hitler's nazis and bush's republicans.

I agree completely.

Being gay is a right, not a privelege, we are all bisexual, and there is a wide specrum of genders, no one is really all ubermale or all uberfemale. My unionized public school teacher told me this, so I believe it. (My parents disagree, but they are always telling me what to do so I don't listen to them.) So, offering any "cure" is just like hitler's nazis and bush's republicans.

Indeed. Imagine the horror if someone invented a cure for believing in God :P

Indeed. Imagine the horror if someone invented a cure for believing in God :P

You're right Alma Mater. If we could get rid of people who believe in God, just think of all the Progress and Pleasure we would achieve.

They should make it allowed, let people who want to be strait take the drug. becuase there are gay people who dont want to be, and they want to have a family and children but their body doesnt let them. So it should be an optional choice, choose your own sexual oreintation.

They should make it allowed, let people who want to be strait take the drug. becuase there are gay people who dont want to be, and they want to have a family and children but their body doesnt let them. So it should be an optional choice, choose your own sexual oreintation.

It shouldn't be a choice to be gay or not, so the drug should be banned.

Instead, let's make a drug to cure homophobia.

I'm just quoting based on what I learned from my teachers in school.

As previously mentioned, why don't we just cure homophobia?

Better yet, lets make something that'll cure people's fears of being someone else because they're afraid of being judged. Maybe then we'll have a better place, because we'll have more people actually being themselves instead of being fake and trying to fit in.

I'd love to see the amount of people that turn homosexual from that, since usually a good amount of the bashers are just people hiding how they really feel.

But yeah, I'd love to see that get made instead of just curing homophobia, although that one is a good idea as well.

and Barbaric? There is no such thing in hell as "Wanting to be straight" if the person has already made their decision.

seriously, if a person wants to be straight, there's nothing holding them back. It's not like they're going to be homosexual forever. If they don't want to be in some time of their life, they can easily become straight. It's not like it's a drug addiction or anything where they're stuck to it forever.

You're right Alma Mater. If we could get rid of people who believe in God, just think of all the Progress and Pleasure we would achieve.

Actually I would hate that future. I *like* diversity.
But the fact remains that many people seem incapable of seeing anything wrong with statements like "it is a disease which must be cured" when talking about homosexuality, but are terribly insulted if one says the exact same thing about their religion, skin colour, left handedness, musical tastes and so on.

I just wish people would learn to be consistent in their reasoning. Though forcing them to take a pill for that would go a bit too far...

thats what we need, a cure for intolerance-now that is a disease!:gundge:

I agree completely.

Being gay is a right, not a privelege, we are all bisexual, and there is a wide specrum of genders, no one is really all ubermale or all uberfemale. My unionized public school teacher told me this, so I believe it. (My parents disagree, but they are always telling me what to do so I don't listen to them.) So, offering any "cure" is just like hitler's nazis and bush's republicans.

Having lurked in on a number of these threads (and on the Forums in general) for a while now, my brain has long since fried out its Sarcasm Discernment components.

Honest to God, I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. I pray that you are...because it's laugh-out-loud funny.

If you aren't, statements such as, "My unionized public school teacher told me this, so I believe it(....)offering any "cure" is just like hitler's nazis and bush's republicans", well they make you sound like....ummmmm, a f@cking dillweed.

I work in the Chicago Public Schools, and I do my damnedest to see that the level of critical thinking is WAY above what you are expressing here.

If the above is an actual representation of your level of cognition, I think it's time you start actually trying to think once in a while. Because you aren't trying hard enough. What are you, five years old?

However, if the above represents satire of the common "liberal" mindset, well, it's pretty funny...though completely untrue concerning those liberals who actually think about what's going on in life.

I agree that there is a vast spectrum of sexuality. Being "gay" is just one part. I agree that homosexuality is not a choice, but a state of being.

Having said so, the assumption that being gay is a "right, not a privelege" completely misses any real argument. Being gay IS NOT A RIGHT. It is a state of being. In the same way that "being human" is a state of being. One shouldn't force a change on a person's state of being against their will, because at that point you have effectively taken over their personhood.

Such things as personhood are neither "rights" nor "privileges", and to call them such is a diminishment of the issue (an insulting one). "Human rights" are things one is guaranteed because they are a person/human; one is not granted the "right" to be human to begin with, one just is a human. Similarly, one is gay, straight, whatever. It is a state of being.

Yes, if the above quote was lighthearted, that means I'm flying off the handle.

I'm not sure I care, because from bouncing through some of these forums, I have concluded there are plenty who would read your statement (or repeat it verbatim) as intelligent, serious and thoughtful.

That enrages me.:sniper:

Oh, by the way, I don't like our esteemed Prezident at all, nor the SOB's who yank his strings behind the scenes. But Bush and co. have yet to willfully kill nine million unarmed civilians in camps specifically made for the task, all in the name of racial purity...seriously equating him with Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, or even Francisco Franco classifies the speaker as a 'tard.

Having lurked in on a number of these threads (and on the Forums in general) for a while now, my brain has long since fried out its Sarcasm Discernment components.

Honest to God, I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. I pray that you are...because it's laugh-out-loud funny.

If you aren't, statements such as, "My unionized public school teacher told me this, so I believe it(....)offering any "cure" is just like hitler's nazis and bush's republicans", well they make you sound like....ummmmm, a f@cking dillweed.

I work in the Chicago Public Schools, and I do my damnedest to see that the level of critical thinking is WAY above what you are expressing here.

If the above is an actual representation of your level of cognition, I think it's time you start actually trying to think once in a while. Because you aren't trying hard enough. What are you, five years old?

However, if the above represents satire of the common "liberal" mindset, well, it's pretty funny...though completely untrue concerning those liberals who actually think about what's going on in life.

I agree that there is a vast spectrum of sexuality. Being "gay" is just one part. I agree that homosexuality is not a choice, but a state of being.

Having said so, the assumption that being gay is a "right, not a privelege" completely misses any real argument. Being gay IS NOT A RIGHT. It is a state of being. In the same way that "being human" is a state of being. One shouldn't force a change on a person's state of being against their will, because at that point you have effectively taken over their personhood.

Such things as personhood are neither "rights" nor "privileges", and to call them such is a diminishment of the issue (an insulting one). "Human rights" are things one is guaranteed because they are a person/human; one is not granted the "right" to be human to begin with, one just is a human. Similarly, one is gay, straight, whatever. It is a state of being.

Yes, if the above quote was lighthearted, that means I'm flying off the handle.

I'm not sure I care, because from bouncing through some of these forums, I have concluded there are plenty who would read your statement (or repeat it verbatim) as intelligent, serious and thoughtful.

That enrages me.:sniper:

Oh, by the way, I don't like our esteemed Prezident at all, nor the SOB's who yank his strings behind the scenes. But Bush and co. have yet to willfully kill nine million unarmed civilians in camps specifically made for the task, all in the name of racial purity...seriously equating him with Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, or even Francisco Franco classifies the speaker as a 'tard.

wow, that made you mad!

Actually I would hate that future. I *like* diversity.
But the fact remains that many people seem incapable of seeing anything wrong with statements like "it is a disease which must be cured" when talking about homosexuality, but are terribly insulted if one says the exact same thing about their religion, skin colour, left handedness, musical tastes and so on.

I just wish people would learn to be consistent in their reasoning. Though forcing them to take a pill for that would go a bit too far...

I like your line of thinking. People need to figure out that homophobia is THE SAME BULLSHITE non-reasoning, and usually employed for largely the same type of underlying "rationales", as RACISM and RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE.

It hurts to admit that one's sense of need to "preserve cultural values" is just reactionary hogwash; a line of mental defense mechanisms rather than actual values as such.

We've all had to get through it, though. With sexual standpoint, it's particularly hard to overcome, because how one feels in one's heart (and genitals) feels so right, so "normal" and irreversible, that it's hard to believe that anyone could feel differently, and also be "right and normal."

But ya gotta get over it. And act correctly and kindly towards your fellow citizen, because that's what being civilized is.

It's an uphill fight, though. Look at all the genius rocket-scientist renaissance men over in the "Muslims are corrupting our pure European culture/raping our women/et cetera" threads. These guys are deliberately ignorant to their own vicious racism (and yes, that's effectively what it has become). It's the 21st century, and they sound like their Northern Euro Crusader forebears...they can't even get a handle on race, yet they consider their countries "products of the Enlightenment".

Ugly, stupid people. Only stacking up affirmation to my own sick and wrong prejudices about White Euros...God help me.

wow, that made you mad!

Yeah, I get uptight, I guess. :rolleyes: Like I said, I work in the teaching field. Blind verbiage spewed with the "I heard it from my tee-chah" excuse really upsets me.

Posts such as that also give ammunition to the dirtbags that think public education is worthless, "because it's just a bunch of stupid liberals indoctrinating children to blindly mouth their teacher's sentiments".

Any time any student I've had starts mouthing some comfortable liberal aphorism (even though I may agree with its sentiment), they've just earned themselves some serious embarrassment. I don't allow an insult to the intelligence of the class to go unchallenged.

I like your line of thinking. People need to figure out that homophobia is THE SAME BULLSHITE non-reasoning, and usually employed for largely the same type of underlying "rationales", as RACISM and RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE.

It hurts to admit that one's sense of need to "preserve cultural values" is just reactionary hogwash; a line of mental defense mechanisms rather than actual values as such.

We've all had to get through it, though. With sexual standpoint, it's particularly hard to overcome, because how one feels in one's heart (and genitals) feels so right, so "normal" and irreversible, that it's hard to believe that anyone could feel differently, and also be "right and normal."

But ya gotta get over it. And act correctly and kindly towards your fellow citizen, because that's what being civilized is.

It's an uphill fight, though. Look at all the genius rocket-scientist renaissance men over in the "Muslims are corrupting our pure European culture/raping our women/et cetera" threads. These guys are deliberately ignorant to their own vicious racism (and yes, that's effectively what it has become). It's the 21st century, and they sound like their Northern Euro Crusader forebears...they can't even get a handle on race, yet they consider their countries "products of the Enlightenment".

Ugly, stupid people. Only stacking up affirmation to my own sick and wrong prejudices about White Euros...God help me.

ah, ranting just the way I like it. Legibly and full of facts ^_^ But I agree wholeheartedly on this issue.

Yes, and they used to call leucotomy neurosurgery.


Yes, they did.

And they also used to bleed people to let the bad blood out.

What are we talking about?

I wish that I was hot enough to cure a lesbian.

homosexuality is a disease mutation isn't

Well about all this 'society pressure' business: if you're insecure enough about yourself to take a pill to change your sexuality, then that's not really the thing you are insecure about, you're just insecure about yourself in general. Plus if that's the way you are, you'll never be happy no matter what you do. If you wanna take it then that's great, go for it, but don't come back and complain later because it was YOUR choice, not society's.

Come close to me with that cure and I'll just "explode" you. Unless you're wolverine, then you can stab me.

Curing people of a condition that is neither a disease nor genetic is not plausible.

Personally I'd like to get rid of gamblers, alcoholics and liars first.

homosexuality is a disease mutation isn't

And you're an idiot for thinking that Homosexuality is a disease.

And Knight, if we got rid of liars, we'd all be gone, because chances are sometime in their lives, every single person has told a lie.