For Perg, the "Gay" gene.

[John Doe]

his red neck is showing.

Don't be racist.

 

[busybody..]

Is homosexuality a "defect?" First, to address your one thing...

Homosexuals can "recreate." There are countless examples of homosexuals having children. They have both the necessary parts and genetic materials. You confuse the trait of an individual with byproduct of the relationships.

While you label having one leg or downs syndrome as 'defective' I think you mean 'disabled.' I think your terminology of 'defective' and the comparison to a broken TV would pretty much offend anyone, be they wounded soldier, caregiver (Sarah Palin), or anyone else who has had to suffer through disability. These are human beings after all.

Lastly, you may like to think that homosexuality is a 'defect', but in the end what you think does not matter. The reason some things are considered disabilities and others are not is because biomedical institution recognizes them as such. While the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual published by the American Psychiatric Association used to consider homosexuality as a mental condition that was treatable, they no longer do. In other words, being gay is not considered to be defective by medical institutions.

Regarding the ethics of genetic screening for children generally, there are relatively few conditions that are currently screened for and all are considered serious medical conditions. Because being gay is not considered to be a medical condition by the vast majority of the medical establishment screening and aborting gay children would be as likely as screening for short people and aborting them.

Durk

You know what?

You are 100% correct

The word DEFECTIVE was WRONG for me to have used!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your point about wounded soldiers,

Your other points were well said,

And I indeed WAS 100% wrong in my terminology etc

Im sorry!

Thx for pointing it out.............Though I should have realized on my own, DEFECTIVE was the wrong word!

 

[where]

While you label having one leg or downs syndrome as 'defective' I think you mean 'disabled.' I think your terminology of 'defective' and the comparison to a broken TV would pretty much offend anyone, be they wounded soldier, caregiver (Sarah Palin), or anyone else who has had to suffer through disability. These are human beings after all.


Durk

much as I'd hate to disagree with you, Emile, sociology has moved on a bit and so properly having one leg or Down's is an impairment. I know you aren't a great fan of social construction, but your terminology is outdated.

Don't be racist.

I was referring to the hideous new av.

 

[Durkheim]

Actually, "Disability" is still the favored term, with the American Sociological Association having a section on Disability and not one on Impairment. Similarly, the leading authors on these issues such as Bury and Wendell still favor the term. That said, it may be different in the UK.

Oh, and what about my quote regarding DSM IV defining disability doesn't scream social constructionism?

 

[Spider Rand]

You know what?

You are 100% correct

The word DEFECTIVE was WRONG for me to have used!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your point about wounded soldiers,

Your other points were well said,

And I indeed WAS 100% wrong in my terminology etc

Im sorry!

Thx for pointing it out.............Though I should have realized on my own, DEFECTIVE was the wrong word!

And people say you can't be reasoned with.

 

[busybody..]

And people say you can't be reasoned with.

"people" are wrong

are'nt they?

 

[Sean]

I'm thinking that anyone that rabidly anti gay would also be rabidly anti-abortion.

 

[Spider Rand]

I'm thinking that anyone that rabidly anti gay would also be rabidly anti-abortion.

People rabidly anything will usually make exceptions if it means getting rid of something they oppose. Even stringent Christians usually favor some abortion, if not in cases of rape, then at least those involving incest. And look at the number of Pro-Life people who are also for the death penalty. It's okay to kill the guilty and the evil. I'm sure enough people still view gay as evil to abort a fair percentage.

 

[where]

Actually, "Disability" is still the favored term, with the American Sociological Association having a section on Disability and not one on Impairment. Similarly, the leading authors on these issues such as Bury and Wendell still favor the term. That said, it may be different in the UK.

Oh, and what about my quote regarding DSM IV defining disability doesn't scream social constructionism?

the US still doesn't differentiate between impairment and disability? I haven't read much of Wendell's work, but from what I recall, she does seem to make the distinction in "the rejected body".

and yes, it does. I always liked Bogdan and Taylor's argument about the social construction of intellectual impairment (mental *wince* retardation to you yanks).

 

[unregistered]

 

[busybody..]

its settled science

I know

"Perg" says so

 

[Ishmael]

Homosexuality a defect? I'd have to say so, defect being defined as an undesireable trait. If it does prove to be genetic it most certainly isn't a gene combination that would be selected for dominance if for no other reason than should that have occured the species would more than likely be extinct by now.

I suppose I'm going to have to endure a bunch of PC idiots berating me as a homophobe or something, what else is new? But the fact of the matter is that the word 'defect' has no sociological conotations with regard to congenital issues. Once more, if it were to be proven to be genetic it would be an anomoly that occured in X number of births per thousand. Any sociological or cultural stigma associated with the congenital condition would be solely in the minds of those pointing their fingers.

Would parents choose to abort a child carrying the "Gay" gene? You betcha, and for any one of a hundred different reasons. None of which are anybodies business but the parents. Would some parents choose to continue the pregnancy? Most certainly and for any number of reasons that aren't anybody elses business either.

Ishmael

 

[unregistered]

 

[busybody..]

Homosexuality a defect? I'd have to say so, defect being defined as an undesireable trait. If it does prove to be genetic it most certainly isn't a gene combination that would be selected for dominance if for no other reason than should that have occured the species would more than likely be extinct by now.

I suppose I'm going to have to endure a bunch of PC idiots berating me as a homophobe or something, what else is new? But the fact of the matter is that the word 'defect' has no sociological conotations with regard to congenital issues. Once more, if it were to be proven to be genetic it would be an anomoly that occured in X number of births per thousand. Any sociological or cultural stigma associated with the congenital condition would be solely in the minds of those pointing their fingers.

Would parents choose to abort a child carrying the "Gay" gene? You betcha, and for any one of a hundred different reasons. None of which are anybodies business but the parents. Would some parents choose to continue the pregnancy? Most certainly and for any number of reasons that aren't anybody elses business either.

Ishmael

I said DEFECTIVE

I was bashed for that.

I admit that DEFECTIVE is more impactful than is a DEFECT

!

 

[unregistered]

 

[busybody..]

artistic

 

[Luk]

Homosexuality a defect? I'd have to say so, defect being defined as an undesireable trait. If it does prove to be genetic it most certainly isn't a gene combination that would be selected for dominance if for no other reason than should that have occured the species would more than likely be extinct by now.

I suppose I'm going to have to endure a bunch of PC idiots berating me as a homophobe or something, what else is new? But the fact of the matter is that the word 'defect' has no sociological conotations with regard to congenital issues. Once more, if it were to be proven to be genetic it would be an anomoly that occured in X number of births per thousand. Any sociological or cultural stigma associated with the congenital condition would be solely in the minds of those pointing their fingers.

Would parents choose to abort a child carrying the "Gay" gene? You betcha, and for any one of a hundred different reasons. None of which are anybodies business but the parents. Would some parents choose to continue the pregnancy? Most certainly and for any number of reasons that aren't anybody elses business either.

Ishmael

Undesireable by who?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Ishmael]

CJH came out of the woodwork screaming when he saw I used the term this morning.

Yeah, I saw that. And I saw the attempt to equate it with having blue eyes or some such thing. What do you want from a Civil Rights attorney?

Pushing the envvelope a little further out, in the not to distant future 'designer babies' will become a reality. One can only wonder how many parents will check the "Homosexual" box when selecting for attributes?

Ishmael

 

[cjh]

Yeah, I saw that. And I saw the attempt to equate it with having blue eyes or some such thing. What do you want from a Civil Rights attorney?

Pushing the envvelope a little further out, in the not to distant future 'designer babies' will become a reality. One can only wonder how many parents will check the "Homosexual" box when selecting for attributes?

Ishmael

here's a definition of "birth defect."

"A birth defect is an abnormality of structure, function or metabolism (body chemistry) present at birth that results in physical or mental disabilities or death. Thousands of different birth defects have been identified."

https://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1206.asp

i have a hard time equating homosexuality with a disability. maybe at one time it may not have been the best trait for survival of the species; that is hardly an issue today, though.

and for what it is worth, the great bulk of my fees originated with--as in representing them as their counsel--hospitals, doctors, accountants, brokerage houses, chemical companies and small business owners.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

You know, try as I might, I just can't seem to muster much interest in homosexuality one way or another. "Whatever floats your boat".

I do notice, however, that Ishmael and Vettebigot seem to fixate on homosexuality in thread after thread, year after year with an intensity that most folks might consider a bit obsessive.

Why do you suppose that is?

 

[The Mutt]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_a0qwYVj4Z3A/SlbH9ppsesI/AAAAAAAADrw/wgUKaY0nmAM/s320/gene+wilder.jpeg

 

[cjh]

You know, try as I might, I just can't seem to muster much interest in homosexuality one way or another. "Whatever floats your boat".

I do notice, however, that Ishmael and Vettebigot seem to fixate on homosexuality in thread after thread, year after year with an intensity that most folks might consider a bit obsessive.

Why do you suppose that is?

i don't notice that in ish.

vette, however, has a particularly wide-stance posting style.

 

[unregistered]