No i think homosexuality isn't harmful and since the world is overcrowded its a good natural way of slightly going towards preventing over population.
Also from a less highbrow perspective, more women for me if gay men don't want them and more lesbian sex for me to watch.

I'm not necessarily against all genetic experimentation in humans though, i think its amazing there might be a technology developed to prevent illness and disability before it even occurs.

I can see a reason to 'cure' a lot of issues in the world due to peoples predisposition far before thinking homosexuals deserve a special treatment program.

(February 27, 2013 at 8:30 pm)paulpablo Wrote: No i think homosexuality isn't harmful and since the world is overcrowded its a good natural way of slightly going towards preventing over population.

Great point.
So going with your observation and tweaking the OP question a tad, ask how many heterosexuals would volunteer to be 'cured' of being straight?

If it helped to save the world from the overpopulation factor that's making survival and especially in third world countries, an issue?

It would be an interesting take to see how many people who are all for homosexual rights, volunteer to become homosexuals.

(February 27, 2013 at 9:44 pm)Nobody Wrote: It would be an interesting take to see how many people who are all for homosexual rights, volunteer to become homosexuals.

Or bisexual? Pansexual? Transexual?

If it were made a choice, why not go broad? Why not be cured one way and then back the other way? It's an interesting prospect when it actually is a choice

I'm sure some people would volunteer to change their sexuality because you know, if there's something that can be done that's weird someone somewhere is going to do it, but i think its fairly obvious the general rule is people are gay because they like being gay and straight because they like being straight so barely anyone would volunteer to change.

---

(February 27, 2013 at 9:50 pm)Question Mark Wrote:

(February 27, 2013 at 9:44 pm)Nobody Wrote: It would be an interesting take to see how many people who are all for homosexual rights, volunteer to become homosexuals.

Or bisexual? Pansexual? Transexual?

If it were made a choice, why not go broad? Why not be cured one way and then back the other way? It's an interesting prospect when it actually is a choice

Transexual isn't a sexuality, also in the context of this proposed situation where people are volunteering to become homosexuals to prevent population overflow becoming pan sexual or bi sexual wouldn't have much benefit.

(February 27, 2013 at 9:44 pm)Nobody Wrote: Great point.
So going with your observation and tweaking the OP question a tad, ask how many heterosexuals would volunteer to be 'cured' of being straight?

(February 27, 2013 at 10:19 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I'm sure some people would volunteer to change their sexuality because you know, if there's something that can be done that's weird someone somewhere is going to do it, but i think its fairly obvious the general rule is people are gay because they like being gay and straight because they like being straight so barely anyone would volunteer to change.

---

(February 27, 2013 at 9:50 pm)Question Mark Wrote: Or bisexual? Pansexual? Transexual?

If it were made a choice, why not go broad? Why not be cured one way and then back the other way? It's an interesting prospect when it actually is a choice

Transexual isn't a sexuality, also in the context of this proposed situation where people are volunteering to become homosexuals to prevent population overflow becoming pan sexual or bi sexual wouldn't have much benefit.

It was a joke, honestly. By this point I thought people weren't taking the issue very seriously, so I threw in some implications of rampant promiscuity, which is a stereotype of pansexuals and bisexuals (as I'm only too familiar), and of misguided collectivism (transexuals not being an orientation as you pointed out). Did I not convey the irony very well? It doesn't always translate so well online without the body language and tone.

---

(February 27, 2013 at 10:19 pm)paulpablo Wrote: Transexual isn't a sexuality, also in the context of this proposed situation where people are volunteering to become homosexuals to prevent population overflow becoming pan sexual or bi sexual wouldn't have much benefit.

I am sorry if I gave some sort of offense or said something insensitive

First of all, I'd like to make sure everyone understands that I'm talking about preventing homosexuality and everything else mentioned below before birth.

How should we define body defects and illnesses if we were to prevent any of them? Just a hundred years, homosexuality was treated as an illness but now it's just a different way of life.

If baldness were preventable, should it be prevented? Many men carry the bald look well after all.

If obesity were preventable, should it be? Obesity can of course lead to health problems but there's a sizable minority of people who find it sexy.

If the having red hair and freckles was preventable should it be? Gingers are more prone to skin cancer I think but they sure look cool.

To me I guess it'd be best to prevent those things that you know that for certain that absolutely no one would want like cancer, debilitating illness, deformities etc.

(February 27, 2013 at 9:13 am)earmuffs Wrote: Here's an alternative question.
If there was a magic pill that meant you take it and your baby would come out white, no matter the skin colour of the parents, Asian, African, African American, Latino, etc.. this pill made all babies come out as little blonde haired, blue eyed, western looking babies.
Should people take this pill?

Well white women with white husbands who were cheating with an Asian or African or Latino, etc, person probably should.

Quote:It's natural? Over 700 animal speciies exzibit homosexual activity...

Plenty of them also exhibit cannibalization - spiders, rats... should we do as they do?

(February 28, 2013 at 7:58 am)Aractus Wrote: Plenty of them also exhibit cannibalization - spiders, rats... should we do as they do?

The salient difference between homosexuality and cannibalism in terms of the relationship between animals and humans, is that the concept of homosexuality on its own is entirely innocuous, whereas cannibalism as a way of life is intrinsically invasive on the lives of other people.
IE. those people getting eaten.