Gay Issues - Debate friendly

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Atlanteax
Okay, here's a serious and debatable question... (poised at the end of this intro)

As we know, there's an on-going project to fully map-out the human genome.

The ideal goals to accomplish from the mapping is the identification of genes that dictates resistance to alheimzers, cancer, high blood pressure, metabolism, etc...

So that "Cures" can be found by which certain genes needs to be "manipulated" during the developmenet of a fetus to reduce/eliminate chances of cancer, defects (ie eyesight, hearing), etc.

.

Now, the question is... assuming that there is a gene that regulates sexuality... (hetro vs homo)

Should it become a standard practice to "manipulate" the genes to maximize hetro tendencies?

I'm inclined to say "Yes", as it'd enable the individual to more easily "fit in" society. Instances such as preventing blindness/deafness/etc I would also assume to be a no-brainer.

However, I would expect activist groups (gay pride, disability groups) to protest/defend against such instances... though primarily on what I would believe to be selfish grounds in that they don't want to be "the only ones left" of the "special minority group".

[TheEschaton]

Whereas blindness and high blood pressure are disabilities, sexuality is not.

Gene manipulation is a slippery slope in general. The whole eugenics debate and all that. And Gattaca. Creepy movie.

-TheE-

[Nieninque]

[[quote]Originally posted by Atlanteax
However, I would expect activist groups (gay pride, disability groups) to protest/defend against such instances... though primarily on what I would believe to be selfish grounds in that they don't want to be "the only ones left" of the "special minority group".

I would protest against any kind of genetics that tried to create the "perfect race."

It was only in the 60's or so that some places in the US got rid of compulsory sterilisation for people with learning difficulties.

The problem with schemes such as that is that they are open to be abused and, as such, will be abused.

Rather than spending time effort and so much more on finding a "cure" to something that leads to people being marginalised, why not spend the same time and money and effort on encouraging acceptance and celebrating difference.

[Ravenstorm]

I took my time answering this because as I was formulating my initial response, I started rebutting some of my own points. So I'm going to divide it into two sections, one of which I find very obvious and the second of which I consider a slippery slope.

The obvious: You can't compare a 'gay gene' to a 'cancer gene' for the simple fact that actual diseases bring physical harm to the sufferer. Huntington's is a horrible thing that totally destroys the person who has it as well as the loved ones forced to witness it. Alternate sexuality has no such symptoms. Any degree of suffering brought upon by it, has at its root, societal prejudice. If it were considered just as 'normal' and valid as heterosexuality and treated as such, the person would not in any way be incovenienced. So if we're going to use that arguement in favor of eliminating it, then we must also alter all non-caucasians in predominantly white societies for the very simple fact that we are, in way too many ways, still a very prejudiced people. Gays? Gone. Black? Use that scalpel. Once everyone is white in the US, if prejudice pops up again over eye color, then we can fix that too. So no, society needs to go through its growing pains and learn to deal with the different. Yes, those who are different will suffer to some degree over it. Just like everyone alive suffers over something.

Now we come to the part I'm having an ethical dilemna over... I remember seeing an episode of ER where Doctor Benton's son was diagnosed as being deaf. He wanted the child to be operated on so implants could be used to give the child a measure of hearing. The son's case worker objected, claiming he wasn't 'broken' and didn't need 'fixing'. A 'deaf culture' was mentioned. I'm not deaf. I would never want to be deaf and if it happened? I'd want to be fixed. I can't see how being deaf is anything but a bad thing. I'd horribly miss music. I love hearing the purr of my cats. Deafness? It's a handicap. Fix it. Now substitute queer for deaf. Umm.

All of a sudden, the question is not so black and white. Someone who isn't gay can make similar arguements about what I'm 'missing'. I can argue that I'm missing nothing at all; that there is nothing someone who is straight has that I can not have as well. And I can imagine someone who is deaf using the same exact arguement. They can feel the cat purr. They can feel the vibrations of the music. Is that less than the 'real thing'? Is it equally valid and rewarding for them? You know, I don't have a fucking clue. I do know that I am - now - perfectly happy being gay. That I don't believe I am missing out on anything or that I'm suffering in any way and that being gay is not in any way a handicap. I wouldn't change it now if I could.

That's pretty much what that case worker said about being deaf. I don't have an answer. Maybe in this case the theists are right. Maybe we shouldn't play God. Whatever we do decide to do as a society, it better be well thought out.

Raven

[Latrinsorm]

My eyes are bad. I wouldn't hesitate (for a nanosecond) if I could take a pill and voila my eyes would be perfect. If it were an injection, I would hesitate for 4 nanoseconds, because ew, needles. Having bad eyes, or being deaf, is terribly inconvenient. Not because society looks down upon people with glasses, but because I can't function properly. If I was hermit, I'd still be handicapped. Maybe that's a good benchmark. If X makes life difficult by oneself, then fix X. I guess that means stutterers are SOL, though.

[TheEschaton]

Gene manipulation is a path we must never wander down. Because Raven brought up the good point: we'd be pretty quick to "fix" things we think are wrong, when there's no basis of "wrong" other than it being not our experience.

So, whereas we'd be pretty quick to say, hey, here's the cancer gene, let's fix cancer, people could and would say "Hey, homosexuality is a disease as well, let's fix that."

-TheE-