treatment for lesbian babies"

[amicus]

http://www.physorg.com/news201098328.html

treatment for lesbian babies

~~~

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/science/la-sci-adrenal-20100815

A prenatal pill for congenital adrenal hyperplasia to prevent ambiguous genitalia may reduce the chance that a female with the disorder will be gay. Critics call it engineering for sexual orientation.

~~~

Other than stating that I heard a blurb on the news; followed up, and found the information interesting, I offer no further commentary...at this point...

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yep, it could work.

I'm thinking that, if administered to a male fetus, you could create a very effeminate gay man.

But what woman in her right mind would want to destroy the potential for this kind of passion;

http://www.zgeek.com/forum/gallery/files/1/7/8/6/8/lesbian_kiss.jpg

for her daughter?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Maybe players for the STELLA-OMEGA PSYCHOTROPIC DINNER THEATRE.

 

[amicus]

Par for the course, you never do seem to understand any fact based issue; instead you create an emotional response.

Normative human reproduction is decidely male or female. This report indicates that a chemical imbalance is responsible for an abnormal child.

On one hand, this supports the homosexual position that some children are born gay; on the other hand, it also gives evidence that a hormonal imbalance, for whatever reason, is responsible.

Do you ever use your mind for anything?

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

arguing with you would be like eating dog shit. Not tasty, not nutritious, not worth doing. A complete waste of time.

Laughing at you is a community-building activity, and wastes less time.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Next thing you know queer will be a disability with its own telathon.

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[amicus]

Yet another example of the 'usual suspects' usual attempts to besmirch and character assassinate rather than offer input to a conversation.

Will you now Post some Pornography to attempt another threadjack?

Probably....sad, useless people hssing and snarling in their pens.

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

One wonders if it is a hormonal imbalance that produces pedophiles.

Possibly-- plus fear-based responses to adult sexuality, a misguided impression that "things were better in the old days," and, in ami's case, lack of a rubber spoon.

Hee!

 

[jomar]

Very interesting.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Interesting? No. This board needs another million years of evolution to get to interesting.

 

[amicus]

Very interesting.

~~~

Assuming you are talking about the links and the articles, yes, very.

More informative would be if the researchers could determine why the chemical levels were higher in some cases than others, and, whether there is a 'normative' amount of such chemical production and then again, if it could/should be controlled.

If the research is duplicated and confirmed, it may change the attitude many have concerning being 'born' with one gender or the other or a combination.

Ain't science wunnerful?

ami

 

[Dragonlipz]

One wonders if it is a hormonal imbalance that produces pedophiles.

Such as the type who write the stories that JBJ likes?

 

[Dragonlipz]

~~~

Assuming you are talking about the links and the articles, yes, very.

More informative would be if the researchers could determine why the chemical levels were higher in some cases than others, and, whether there is a 'normative' amount of such chemical production and then again, if it could/should be controlled.

If the research is duplicated and confirmed, it may change the attitude many have concerning being 'born' with one gender or the other or a combination.

Ain't science wunnerful?

ami

Assuming that what is being discussed is actually 'science/research'.....it fails a couple of credibility criterion for what would amount to a responsible line of research......but then, consider the source and the broadcast medium...........AmiCoot, best to leave the science to scientists and the bullshit/fearmongering to guys like you............

 

[Stella_Omega]

~~~

Assuming you are talking about the links and the articles, yes, very.

More informative would be if the researchers could determine why the chemical levels were higher in some cases than others, and, whether there is a 'normative' amount of such chemical production and then again, if it could/should be controlled.

If the research is duplicated and confirmed, it may change the attitude many have concerning being 'born' with one gender or the other or a combination.

Ain't science wunnerful?

ami

Science is pretty interesting stuff, and it's a pity so many people mistake philosophy for science.

It's an even bigger pity that so many people are so woefully ignorant of the philosophies they invoke in the name of science-- and, of course vice versa.

I hardly need point out that the why, the whether, and the could/should are, in fact, being investigated and talked about and argued, and have been since approximately 2002-- without ami's knowledge or participation.

 

[amicus]

Curious connection between nature, reality and science; for example, 105 baby boys are born for each 100 girl babies.

Ever wonder why?

Amicus

 

[ishtat]

There seems to be three possible responses to the issue:-

1 Allow the child to develop as she is. After all, perhaps this is evolution in process?

2 Treat with drugs to produce an idealised( "normative") female acceptable to society.

3 Abort the foetus and try again.

None of these is an easy choice and all assume that there is a normative sexual orientation which is an arguable though undoubtably prevalent concept.

Which would you choose. I would find it very difficult.

 

[amicus]

There seems to be three possible responses to the issue:-

1 Allow the child to develop as she is. After all, perhaps this is evolution in process?

2 Treat with drugs to produce an idealised( "normative") female acceptable to society.

3 Abort the foetus and try again.

None of these is an easy choice and all assume that there is a normative sexual orientation which is an arguable though undoubtably prevalent concept.

Which would you choose. I would find it very difficult.[/QUOTE]

~~~

I will answer that, however, with a caveat or a stipulation that abortion is not an option because it takes innocent human life without cause.

I raised eight children, five girls, three boys, and I have over twenty grandchildren and each and every one are either definitely male or definitely female and I love all of them.

The life of a child who is uncertain of their gender, must be a painful and miserable experience, so reason dictates that if it is possible to enhance the natural gender of the child inutero, that would be the rational and moral decision to make.

Amicus

 

[Stella_Omega]

For those of us who are genuinely concerned or curious;

http://www.congenitaladrenalhyperplasia.org/

Ishtat, I would not abort a fetus for genital abnormalities, they would not affect her quality of life. Nor would her gender orientation be a reason to worry either.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Curous connection between nature, reality and science; for example, 105 baby boys are born for each 100 girl babies.

Ever wonder why?

Amicus

Those extra boys keep San Francisco and Key West populated.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Such as the type who write the stories that JBJ likes?

Youre just jealous.

As for SARAH, jeez, I'm a naif compared to our cougar teachers and their middle school boy toys.

 

[ishtat]

Ishtat, I would not abort a fetus for genital abnormalities, they would not affect her quality of life. Nor would her gender orientation be a reason to worry either.

I acknowledge your view on this point . However in a world where foetus' are aborted because of their gender not just their gender orientation I think this difficult question has to be asked. It also has to be dealt with because whether we like it or not abortions will be sought and obtained for these reasons.

 

[amicus]

I acknowledge your view on this point . However in a world where foetus' are aborted because of their gender not just their gender orientation I think this difficult question has to be asked. It also has to be dealt with because whether we like it or not abortions will be sought and obtained for these reasons.

~~~

Ishtat, this is harsh, but intended to educate, not excoriate: In Germany, it was legal during the Nazi Regime to eliminate Jews by any means. Because a thing is 'legal' under the law of a nation, does not mean it is 'moral' in the eyes of humanity.

The Holocaust was immoral, so is abortion. It is not the State that determines human morality, it is reality and the innate rights of an individual to his life.

Abortion is only a moral action when the life of the mother is threatened and no other solution is available. The decision then, mother or child, is still heartwrenching, but if reason prevails, one sacrifices the child and saves the mother.

Amicus

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

We have abortions because we believe other humans are property. The therapy term is 'objectification'. That is, you make someone into something. Its a kissing cousin of self mutilation, too.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

duplicate