That makes ZERO logical sense when you look at what a human body does when it sees a person you are physically attacted to. Its 100% chemical and physical. Its based on your hormones and chemical balances... ie. the genetic make up of your body. 

You don't control that with your mind. Ask anyone that is an adult and gay, "where you born gay or chose it?". 100% will say born. They'll remember many parts of childhood where they just liked the same sex but pushed it away due to society.

Well, I don't mind abortions at an early stage. But for such a trivial thing, I wouldn't find it worth it to make my wife go through the hurdle.

I agree that genetics play a big part, but I think so does the subconsciousness, which might be why often people chose partners that resemble their own parents in behavior and it makes sense as it's easier to create a relationship to somebody you subconsciously feel close to (and it's easier to create a relationship to somebody you feel attracted to due to genetic aspects). There might be a tiny bit of consicousness involved aswell, although maybe not in all cases.

Maybe it's been said already by now, but I believe this is his point. It's a trap of a question asking social conservatives to choose between abortion and homosexuality, framed in such a way that they must make that choice.

They won't abort the baby because they choose not to. They will all allow the baby to be born, knowing that if the baby grows up to be homosexual, that is the child's "choice" and the parents are not responsible for his or her "sin." Basically superchunk didn't take into account the belief in free will, the belief that even someone who is "born gay (if that were possible)" can choose not to be, and by choosing instead to embrace their homosexuality, they are embracing the devil himself.

Just so we're clear here, I'm all for sexual freedom. I don't buy into all that sinning crap. Just trying to help explain how the more religious folks might view the situation.

Maybe you became gay from using your left hand to masturbate... (j/k)

OT: No. But that question isn't problematic for me.

No. Just No.

No, and that's a really fucked up thing to do. Aborting a child because it is possibly "gay" really makes me question a person's morals to begin with. Save a child's life of torment? Being gay is punishable by death in certain countries, but its not majority of the world. You should be there to support and protect your child. If you love your child -- you won't care what sexual orientation it is.

I look at it this way.... there are definitely worse things in this world (poverty, homelessness, violence & wars). *shakes head*

Comedic relief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4nt4U7YGaI

Oh my fucking god no. That's fucked up.

This thread gave me cancer. I've lost respect for several members of this site.

To answer your question, no I would no abort it, but I would change their gene if that was an option. Being gay in most countries is an actual torment.

A tricky question. You could have also asked: Are you anti-homosexual? Aborting your unborn homosexual baby means to deny homosexuality in general. This will lead to a more difficult situation for homosexual people than they are already facing right now.