By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Stem Cells: Same-sex couples to have their own genetic children in future.

sapphi_snake said:
Chairman-Mao said:
sapphi_snake said:
Chairman-Mao said:

As long as my tax dollars don't go towards this then go have a ball. But if my tax goes towards funding this at all I'm protesting. 

Why? It's amazing and very useful for mankind.


How is it useful to anyone except the gay couple themselves?

If there's a plague that wipes ouy all the women (it could happen), humanity will not be doomed!!!


I hope that doesn't happen. Can't imagine a world without women.



Around the Network
Chairman-Mao said:
sapphi_snake said:
Chairman-Mao said:
sapphi_snake said:
Chairman-Mao said:

As long as my tax dollars don't go towards this then go have a ball. But if my tax goes towards funding this at all I'm protesting. 

Why? It's amazing and very useful for mankind.


How is it useful to anyone except the gay couple themselves?

If there's a plague that wipes ouy all the women (it could happen), humanity will not be doomed!!!


I hope that doesn't happen. Can't imagine a world without women.

We need to take precautions anyways!



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

sapphi_snake said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
Kasz216 said:


Not really.  I mean, unless you are going to activily gentically alter people for superior genes and take out hereditary diseases and the like...

having two gay people have a biological son isn't actually useful for mankind. 

Great for the indvidual parents sure, but it holds no actual benefit for mankind since the genetics of two people are going to be random, and when you consider the losing out on adoption and overpopulation you could argue that on a larger sense it'd be damaging.

It's the same with surogacy for infertile straight couples.  Really it'd be great if we could move away from a culture that suggests that you NEED to have a child who has your DNA.

That's in our blood. We feel closer to a true blood relative. Lots of studies have proven this. Evolution-wise it does make a lot of sense.

Actually it's nothing more than cultural indoctrination.

Actually its called evolution and has been the driving force for all life for the last couple billion years. It has nothing to do with cultural indoctrination and everything to do with how our brains have been programmed through evolution to perceive those that are your close relatives. Evolution makes us to try to pass on as many genes of ourselves as we can.



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

radiantshadow92 said:

Very interesting. Now what are YOUR thoughts?



i thought butter tasted better with bread but this is bigger news then that, but with republicant's taking back control of the house it will never fly.



Mendicate Bias said:

Actually its called evolution and has been the driving force for all life for the last couple billion years. It has nothing to do with cultural indoctrination and everything to do with how our brains have been programmed through evolution to perceive those that are your close relatives. Evolution makes us to try to pass on as many genes of ourselves as we can.

One of the most idiotic things people tend to do nowadays is attribute cultural things to evolution. Our brains cannot percieve those that are our close relatives, as we won't know if someone is related to us or not, unless we're told that. Actually the entire concept of "relative" is cultural. People may be predisposed to become attatched to the ones who raise them, and vice versa, however it's irrelevant whether they're blood relatives or not.

The whole aversion towards adoption thing is simply a cultural stigma.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Around the Network
sapphi_snake said:
Chairman-Mao said:
sapphi_snake said:
Chairman-Mao said:

As long as my tax dollars don't go towards this then go have a ball. But if my tax goes towards funding this at all I'm protesting. 

Why? It's amazing and very useful for mankind.


How is it useful to anyone except the gay couple themselves?

If there's a plague that wipes ouy all the women (it could happen), humanity will not be doomed!!!

WIthout women we might just blow up the planet.



In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.

Hell no.

 

They made there decision when they decided to be gay.



Nobody's perfect. I aint nobody!!!

Killzone 2. its not a fps. it a FIRST PERSON WAR SIMULATOR!!!! ..The true PLAYSTATION 3 launch date and market dominations is SEP 1st

Serious_frusting said:

Hell no.

 

They made there decision when they decided to be gay.

Gay people are gay, they don't decide to be gay. Also, even if it were a decision, it would be one regarding whom they date. Don't see what it has to do with this story.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Stefan.De.Machtige said:
Seece said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:

That's pretty irrelevant. The future  will have a lot less gays - not that the current - 5% is much.

The (in part the same) selection techniques and human nature will make sure of that. We are already selecting on certain things. That list will be expanded and 'gay' will be on it.

Humans have always wanted to select on foetus' - creating the best of them. Now we will have the actual tools... and we will use them. Human nature is human nature.

Thankfully there are a lot more non prejudice people out there that would be happy with a gay child.

I wouldn't count on 'non prejudice people'. Man is a group beast. He follows the group. Pure instinct. Sure, we like to be special, but inside the group. Anything that (even remotly) brings us outside it, is seen as not desired >  Basic human nature.

Lets be honest, being gay doesn't make you popular. And looking at human nature, its history and the cruel natural world we come from, that isn't going to change soon - if ever.

We also see new cultures and ideas rise and ideals and prejudices change or dissappear altogether. Take the anchient Greeks, it was expected a Spartan male would have sexual relations with other men. We have no way of predicting how cultural ideas will change in the future.



Serious_frusting said:

Hell no.

 

They made there decision when they decided to be gay.


Seems like someone's parents were in the same gene pool.

 

Anyways. WHO WANTS MY BABIES?!?