NationStates Jolt Archive

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?

Not really, no.

theoretiacly yes..but practicaly no

... huh?...:confused: ...

It is not wrong in the slightest.

Your attempt at forcing a logical inconsistency out of the pro-abortion side will fall short on this one.

Her conscience, not mine.

Eh.

It is not wrong in the slightest.

Your attempt at forcing a logical inconsistency out of the pro-abortion side will fall short on this one.


Who says the target is that narrow??

No.

Heh.

Who says the target is that narrow??

It seems you were targeting those who support homosexuality and abortion, and pitting their views against each other. But that was just my approximation. Do you have a more grandiose scheme in mind?

It seems you were targeting those who support homosexuality and abortion, and pitting their views against each other. But that was just my approximation. Do you have a more grandiose scheme in mind?

he plans to take over THE WORLD!!! By pitting liberals against one another, and, indeed, themselves, he pland to destroy liberalsm everywhere, and then through a series of ingenious bribes and blackmailings, he shall rise up to the conrol of nation, and use the remaining (conservative population to his advantage, controlling territory everywhere, starting wars, and gaining allies who he eventually subjugates, gaining control of the WORLD!!!!

Muah. Ha. Ha.

Do you have a more grandiose scheme in mind?


Yes.
Always.

he plans to take over THE WORLD!!! By pitting liberals against one another, and, indeed, themselves, he pland to destroy liberalsm everywhere, and then through a series of ingenious bribes and blackmailings, he shall rise up to the conrol of nation, and use the remaining (conservative population to his advantage, controlling territory everywhere, starting wars, and gaining allies who he eventually subjugates, gaining control of the WORLD!!!!

Muah. Ha. Ha.


You totally missed the God hates fags group pitted against the pro-life crowd.

Yes.
Always.

Hmmm....I feel a sequel coming on....

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?

It would be wrong to stop them.

No. I happen to think that would be an idiotic reason to abort, but people are allowed to abort for idiotic reasons if they so choose.

It would be wrong to stop them.
.

Well, I belong to what in the media is a unique little group, but I know lots of us. Its the, let-the-gays marry, pro-life constituency. I think of it as the Equal Rights for All, including Gays and Unborn Children, group. (yes, yes, they aren't children or humans or whatever. I'm not trying to convince u I'm right, I'm stating my position, so don't attack, please). So, from my point of view, there is an enormous problem with your suggestion. There is EVERYTHING wrong with the proposed scenario.

Personally I think it's wrong to abort someone because of their sexuality but it's her body and her choice so she can abort until her little homophobic hearts content.

Her conscience, not mine.

*nods*

Its incredibly wrong... because how the hell will they know if they are gay? Are these time-traveling abortion-recieving homosexual-birthing women? That scares me, and what scares me is WRONG.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?

I am willing to bet that most of those that support abortion don't have issues with homosexuals.

Your agument falls apart.

Its incredibly wrong... because how the hell will they know if they are gay?

Because they are asking for prada?

Short answer: Woman's right to chose. If she wants an abortion, she should be allowed to have one.

Long answer: If a person is callous enough to desire aborting only because of the sexuality it will eventually discover, that person ought to abort. No baby should be born unwanted. And I hope that whoever would use such an idiotic reason to have an abortion ends up never being able to have children because one thing a parent needs to be, is accepting.

edit: :headbang: not to outright say that I wish infertility on anyone- I said that wrong. But anyone who would get an abortion for that ridiculous a reason? I can't see someone who would do that ever being a good parent. That is just outright hate.

her choice

I believe it would be quite OK for a woman to have an abortion based on the potential child's potential sexuality. But I doubt sexuality is genetic.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?

That is the most stupid "if" I've read in quite some time. So thank you, actually. "There is no person in the womb":confused: Homophobics reclaiming their rights:confused: I say try to solve more urgent questionnairres first, like WTF am I doing looking at that pigeon for half an hour?

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?

It would be every bit as right or wrong as aborting unborn children because will grow up short. Or blonde. Or musically talented instead of scientifically minded.

I'll let you know as soon as I grow a womb and allow myself an opinion on this issue.

You totally missed the God hates fags group pitted against the pro-life crowd.

No, we just ignore crazy people.

Personally I think it's wrong to abort someone because of their sexuality but it's her body and her choice so she can abort until her little homophobic hearts content.


One question: how would anyone be able to tell a homosexual embryo?

Unless people are now saying that it IS natural, and not a factor of the environment....

Which blows the Phelpses' crap out of the water, because if you are born homosexual, and we are made in God's image....

No, we just ignore crazy people.
So.. I can never be banned? *schemes* :p

So.. I can never be banned? *schemes* :p

Would you really want to bet on that?
Just saying.

Would you really want to bet on that?
Just saying.
:eek: No ma'am. *runs* Also, technically.

One question: how would anyone be able to tell a homosexual embryo?

Unless people are now saying that it IS natural, and not a factor of the environment....

Which blows the Phelpses' crap out of the water, because if you are born homosexual, and we are made in God's image....
They could say it's a mutation, or perhaps a result of inbreeding, then they could claim it‘s a sin born of sin. I agree it's a weak argument but it IS an argument. Also, I don't believe any of that, I just have a need to be argumentative, and felt I needed to stay on-topic. *runs*

If homosexuality is genetic, the ultra-right fundamentalists will go insane :D
Because if homosexuality is genetic, it can be "cured" with genetic engineering. But genetic engineering is immoral to them, so the homosexuals can't be cured. Yet they could be cured if they allowed GE...(circular logic repeats ad inifinitum)

If homosexuality is genetic, the ultra-right fundamentalists will go insane :D
Because if homosexuality is genetic, it can be "cured" with genetic engineering. But genetic engineering is immoral to them, so the homosexuals can't be cured. Yet they could be cured if they allowed GE...(circular logic repeats ad inifinitum)
Will go? *In larry the cableguy voice* I appologize for that lord, and be with the starving pygmies in new ginea.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?
Right in what sense? It would be lawful (her body, thus her right to decide) but not virtuous (since it would show prejudice and intolerance)

I am willing to bet that most of those that support abortion don't have issues with homosexuals.

Your agument falls apart.


I pose no argument to fall apart.
Your bet is at least partially the reason for the question.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?
No, it's her choice.

No, it's not wrong. The less stupid people breed the better... a woman who would abort a gay embryo is most definitely too stupid and bigotted to be a parent in the first place. The last thing this world needs are more self-hating homosexuals who go about beating on those who feel free enough to out themselves.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?
No.

Well, I belong to what in the media is a unique little group, but I know lots of us. Its the, let-the-gays marry, pro-life constituency. I think of it as the Equal Rights for All, including Gays and Unborn Children, group.
Except of course women, who are walking incubators.

If homosexuality is genetic, the ultra-right fundamentalists will go insane :D
Because if homosexuality is genetic, it can be "cured" with genetic engineering. But genetic engineering is immoral to them, so the homosexuals can't be cured. Yet they could be cured if they allowed GE...(circular logic repeats ad inifinitum)
How can those already "insane" go insane? :confused:

One question: how would anyone be able to tell a homosexual embryo?

Unless people are now saying that it IS natural, and not a factor of the environment....

Which blows the Phelpses' crap out of the water, because if you are born homosexual, and we are made in God's image....
Exactly. :)

No, it's not wrong. The less stupid people breed the better... a woman who would abort a gay embryo is most definitely too stupid and bigotted to be a parent in the first place. The last thing this world needs are more self-hating homosexuals who go about beating on those who feel free enough to out themselves.


While some will undoubtedly make that choice based on bigotry, some may simply opt for a child they feel is going to share the life outlook they are familiar with or perhaps they may just opt for the child that won't have to face the potential hardships of being different.
Parents today seem willing to go to extrodinary lengths to help their children either fit in or be popular.
It's not inconcievable that parents such as Sinuhue that may choose a homosexual child would be in such a minority that the homosexual population could be a samll fraction of current numbers in the span of a few generations.

One question: how would anyone be able to tell a homosexual embryo?


We can't.
The question makes the assumption that it is a genteic difference and if true, that could be tested for.
It's a pair of assumptions under the "If" category, not real world. At least, not real world today.

While some will undoubtedly make that choice based on bigotry, some may simply opt for a child they feel is going to share the life outlook they are familiar with or perhaps they may just opt for the child that won't have to face the potential hardships of being different.
Parents today seem willing to go to extrodinary lengths to help their children either fit in or be popular.
It's not inconcievable that parents such as Sinuhue that may choose a homosexual child would be in such a minority that the homosexual population could be a samll fraction of current numbers in the span of a few generations.
If that's the case then why not develop a genetic test for perfect eyesight and abort all kids who will need glasses? That's way more noticable at a young age than being gay.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?

maybe I didn't understand, but who ever has scientifically stated that homosexuality is genetic? heard a lot of cheating about it, but never some scientific demonstration, which are the only ones who should have some real meaning...
BTW, if it was as you say, it would be some form of racism: you don't want the child only 'cause he/she'll be gay, as you couldn't want a black/jewish/latino babe, and evey other sort of race...

its not wrong to get an abortion for any reason whatsoever as long as its within that first 12-20 week window for "abortion on demand" (time limit varies with jurisdiction eh?)

it would be just as dickish to abort because the baby is a boy but she wanted a girl or if it had the genetic predisposition to be short or of below average intelligence but none of it is "wrong" as long as it occurs early enough.

i would be very opposed to putting gay genes on "the list" of reasons why a woman can get a late term abortion. some disappointing things just dont count as defects.

It would be every bit as right or wrong as aborting unborn children because will grow up short. Or blonde. Or musically talented instead of scientifically minded.How is it that you always end up saying something similar to what I would say?

Mommy, I'm scared...

If that's the case then why not develop a genetic test for perfect eyesight and abort all kids who will need glasses? That's way more noticable at a young age than being gay.


OK, why not?
I don't know what it being noticeable at younger ages has to do with it.

maybe I didn't understand, but who ever has scientifically stated that homosexuality is genetic?

Hence the If.

If homosexuality is genetic and if women have an absolute right to abortion because there is no person in the womb, would it be wrong for women to exercise their rights and abort genetically homosexual embryos?
Very few people say that women have an absolute right to abortion.


There is no such thing as an absolute right.

Hence the If.

if ifs and buts were scrapes and cuts we would all bleed to death....