Same Sex Marriage

[Saito S]

Well, yeah, OK, but I think we're splitting hairs at this point, considering everyone knows there is a link/association between transgenderism and homosexuality.
If you disagree, than you disagree. I'm not going to split hairs on this.

Identifying and discussing the very significant differences between transgenderism and homosexuality is not "splitting hairs".

well, if homos can be married, and they can adopt, and parents have a pre-existing right to genetically engineer their offspring, and in this society there is no disadvantage to being gay, and it's even possible to genetically engineer homosexuals and heterosexuals, than sure, OK.

I can't put my finger on it, but there is something unsettling about that scenario.
...
I dunno. Just sounds weird to me. But again, if all other factors mentioned are within the boundaries of the law, than why not.

What scenario, specifically?

Does the idea of parents - any parents - being able to choose such details as sexual orientation before birth via genetic manipulation make you uncomfortable? If yes, then ok, I can see how, and will admit that I find it a bit unsettling myself.

On the other hand, do you mean that you find the idea of a couple making their child gay before birth via genetic manipulation unsettling, specifically? While you WOULDN'T find a couple doing the same thing, but making their child straight, unsettling?

Just wondering.

Re: the former classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder: I'm not quoting all of what you wrote about it because it's massive, but in short: no, it's not a mental disorder; no, saying it's not a mental disorder doesn't mean I think psychology is a crock; yes, anyone who would STILL - now, today - declare that homosexuality is a mental disorder is making a baseless, false statement, and is probably a homophobe.

People once "knew" that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it, and that smoking cigarettes all the damn time wasn't dangerous to one's health. That a previous "fact" has in modern times been proven to be nonsense is hardly new or unusual.

We model him after Tom Paris. He's gay, and has a husband. Early in the first season, his husband dies. So he's single, and that will give him dating opportunities. I say he should get some romance scenes. Not a lot, just the usual trek series amount.


By itself, this is completely boring.

So every heterosexual relationship on Star Trek that we saw over the years that was relatively "normal" was also boring, yes?

Now that's some find quality Trek right there.

Seriously, it's up there with Fair Haven or the decon scene in Enterprise!

I think it would earn it an R-rating right there just for language.

Nah. There's nothing in RB_Kandy's wacko scenario that would gain an R rating, were it a movie. I've seen MUCH more harsh language on 8-9PM slot police dramas.

I think you can make a good science fiction show without restricting it from children. After all the Children are our future, and Star Trek is about the Future. I can't have lewdness and sexually suggestive language cause the show to be restricted from children to watch. I think it was pretty bad what they did with BSG, it used to be on cereal boxes, and there was a line of Battlestar Galactica toys, with the new series, because of the vulgar languages and graphic violence, its for adults only.

I don't want Star Trek going the adults only route, and give up that lucrative toy line besides.

Some sci-fi can be like that, sure (on cereal boxes and such). But some can be darker, more unsettling, and not meant for kids.

I didn't even like nuBSG all that much (though I didn't like the original either), my point is, there's room for everything.

 

[Mars]

Well, yeah, OK, but I think we're splitting hairs at this point, considering everyone knows there is a link/association between transgenderism and homosexuality.
If you disagree, than you disagree. I'm not going to split hairs on this.

Identifying and discussing the very significant differences between transgenderism and homosexuality is not "splitting hairs".

well, if homos can be married, and they can adopt, and parents have a pre-existing right to genetically engineer their offspring, and in this society there is no disadvantage to being gay, and it's even possible to genetically engineer homosexuals and heterosexuals, than sure, OK.

I can't put my finger on it, but there is something unsettling about that scenario.
...
I dunno. Just sounds weird to me. But again, if all other factors mentioned are within the boundaries of the law, than why not.

What scenario, specifically?

Does the idea of parents - any parents - being able to choose such details as sexual orientation before birth via genetic manipulation make you uncomfortable? If yes, then ok, I can see how, and will admit that I find it a bit unsettling myself.

On the other hand, do you mean that you find the idea of a couple making their child gay before birth via genetic manipulation unsettling, specifically? While you WOULDN'T find a couple doing the same thing, but making their child straight, unsettling?

Just wondering.

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

After all, if your an alien, you have alien children, homosexuals are human and so have human children, homosexuality is a trait that their offspring might not share, by manipulating them so they are homosexual you are guaranteeing that to some degree they will be a social outcast, and not quite fit in most places. I'm not sure I would want that, even if I was gay, I assume its not a picnic to be attracted to the same sex.

Re: the former classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder: I'm not quoting all of what you wrote about it because it's massive, but in short: no, it's not a mental disorder; no, saying it's not a mental disorder doesn't mean I think psychology is a crock; yes, anyone who would STILL - now, today - declare that homosexuality is a mental disorder is making a baseless, false statement, and is probably a homophobe.

People once "knew" that the Earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it, and that smoking cigarettes all the damn time wasn't dangerous to one's health. That a previous "fact" has in modern times been proven to be nonsense is hardly new or unusual.



So every heterosexual relationship on Star Trek that we saw over the years that was relatively "normal" was also boring, yes?

Seriously, it's up there with Fair Haven or the decon scene in Enterprise!

I think it would earn it an R-rating right there just for language.

Nah. There's nothing in RB_Kandy's wacko scenario that would gain an R rating, were it a movie. I've seen MUCH more harsh language on 8-9PM slot police dramas.

I think you can make a good science fiction show without restricting it from children. After all the Children are our future, and Star Trek is about the Future. I can't have lewdness and sexually suggestive language cause the show to be restricted from children to watch. I think it was pretty bad what they did with BSG, it used to be on cereal boxes, and there was a line of Battlestar Galactica toys, with the new series, because of the vulgar languages and graphic violence, its for adults only.

I don't want Star Trek going the adults only route, and give up that lucrative toy line besides.

Some sci-fi can be like that, sure (on cereal boxes and such). But some can be darker, more unsettling, and not meant for kids.

I didn't even like nuBSG all that much (though I didn't like the original either), my point is, there's room for everything.

 

[beamMe]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

And it's because of people like you that it still is seen as a disadvantage.

What if your child had ()homosexuality?

 

[Kemaiku]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

And it's because of people like you that it still is seen as a disadvantage.

Yeah, it sickens me that these people bang on about homosexuals, bisexuals, transgenders having such a bad life, all the while being the source of that misery.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

And it's because of people like you that it still is seen as a disadvantage.

What if your child had ()homosexuality?

That is an interesting hypothetical.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I find it hard to believe he will be able one day to reproduce, except maybe by mitosis.

 

[The Castellan]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

Well, the blacks, mixed races, and Jews were thought of as the same, and they turned out ok. And just because one has gay parants MEANS NOTHING. I've seen hard nosed, right wing Christian conservatives, heterosexual couples have children who turned out to be gay.....so......to quote Willy Wonka:

You get NOTHING, you LOSE, good DAY, sir!


Oh, and speaking from a pansexual like myself......no, it's not a picnic, it's a BUFFET, dude. Plus Trek might not have been rated R.....but one of the first shows to have blacks and whites kissing, or saying "Damn!" or "Hell!", plus the idea of every bit of humanity now joined togather, rather than competing and fighting each other, that hit shit hit the fan, but....WHO CARES?!

 

[Mars]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

And it's because of people like you that it still is seen as a disadvantage.

What if your child had ()homosexuality?

Homosexuals don't reproduce themselves, we reproduce for them, that is the problem. In order for there to be a next generation of homosexuals, Heterosexuals need to have homosexual children. If we can control whether or not we have them, then I assume most parents would like to have children that are like themselves, that is heterosexual, so we can raise them properly, rather than unlike them. With aliens, they have their own children, they don't depend on humans to have their children for them, unless they are Xenomorphs from the Alien movies.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

And it's because of people like you that it still is seen as a disadvantage.

What if your child had ()homosexuality?

Homosexuals don't reproduce themselves, we reproduce for them, that is the problem. In order for there to be a next generation of homosexuals, Heterosexuals need to have homosexual children. If we can control whether or not we have them, then I assume most parents would like to have children that are like themselves, that is heterosexual, so we can raise them properly, rather than unlike them. With aliens, they have their own children, they don't depend on humans to have their children for them, unless they are Xenomorphs from the Alien movies.

You do realize that gays and lesbians can have natural offspring. They have all the working parts for reproduction.

By your logic I should have been given to left-handed parents at birth to be raise "properly".

Who cares about what fictional aliens can and can't do?

 

[Mars]

Because homosexuality is a social disadvantage, and I would not want my child to have it. Would that be such a terrible thing to do? I feel no obligation to make a contribution to the LGBT community with my offspring.

Well, the blacks, mixed races, and Jews were thought of as the same, and they turned out ok. And just because one has gay parants MEANS NOTHING. I've seen hard nosed, right wing Christian conservatives, heterosexual couples have children who turned out to be gay.....so......to quote Willy Wonka:

Because we currently can't do anything about that, by the 24th century, when homosexuality and its causes are better understood, then perhaps we can, and if we can, we probably will. As for blacks, mixed races, and Jews, they can reproduce themselves without our help, homosexuals can't.

You get NOTHING, you LOSE, good DAY, sir!


Oh, and speaking from a pansexual like myself......no, it's not a picnic, it's a BUFFET, dude. Plus Trek might not have been rated R.....but one of the first shows to have blacks and whites kissing, or saying "Damn!" or "Hell!", plus the idea of every bit of humanity now joined togather, rather than competing and fighting each other, that hit shit hit the fan, but....WHO CARES?!

Blacks and white kissing are fine with me, my brother has a black wife, and its male on female, not a problem either, thay have 5 children. But if I can prevent my child from being homosexual, I will, that's all there is to it. I bear the homosexual community no ill will, I just don't want my children to join them if I can help it.

 

[IndyJones]

so we can raise them properly

We can raise them properly?

Care to try that one again?

 

[Nerys Myk]

You probably can't. So just accept it if it happens.

 

[Mars]

And it's because of people like you that it still is seen as a disadvantage.

What if your child had ()homosexuality?

Homosexuals don't reproduce themselves, we reproduce for them, that is the problem. In order for there to be a next generation of homosexuals, Heterosexuals need to have homosexual children. If we can control whether or not we have them, then I assume most parents would like to have children that are like themselves, that is heterosexual, so we can raise them properly, rather than unlike them. With aliens, they have their own children, they don't depend on humans to have their children for them, unless they are Xenomorphs from the Alien movies.

You do realize that gays and lesbians can have natural offspring. They have all the working parts for reproduction.

By your logic I should have been given to left-handed parents at birth to be raise "properly".

Who cares about what fictional aliens can and can't do?

Gays and lesbians can have children if they force themselves to, it would be going against their inclinations, but even if they did, their children would probably stand no greater chance of being homosexual than anyone else's, so by having children, they do not perpetuate the homosexual community. If by some 24th century magic they tried to make their children homosexual, they might as well become a separate race of hemaphodites so they can perpetuate themselves without medical intervention.

 

[Mars]

You probably can't. So just accept it if it happens.

We accept what the fates hand out to us, if they provide a means of avoiding it we use it however. I can accept a blind child, but it the means to make him see becomes available, then I would use it. The homosexual community exists as a means of coping with a social disadvantage that is handed down to them and that they can't control. If we can avoid having homosexual children, then the homosexual community can't say boo. The blind community can't stop us from curing our blind children if we can, it is the same thing.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Homosexuals don't reproduce themselves, we reproduce for them, that is the problem. In order for there to be a next generation of homosexuals, Heterosexuals need to have homosexual children. If we can control whether or not we have them, then I assume most parents would like to have children that are like themselves, that is heterosexual, so we can raise them properly, rather than unlike them. With aliens, they have their own children, they don't depend on humans to have their children for them, unless they are Xenomorphs from the Alien movies.

You do realize that gays and lesbians can have natural offspring. They have all the working parts for reproduction.

By your logic I should have been given to left-handed parents at birth to be raise "properly".

Who cares about what fictional aliens can and can't do?

Gays and lesbians can have children if they force themselves to, it would be going against their inclinations, but even if they did, their children would probably stand no greater chance of being homosexual than anyone else's, so by having children, they do not perpetuate the homosexual community. If by some 24th century magic they tried to make their children homosexual, they might as well become a separate race of hemaphodites so they can perpetuate themselves without medical intervention.

What inclination prevents homosexuals from wanting to having children???? "Force" them selves????? I don't think being Gay or Lesbian turns off the desire for children.

Being homosexual is hardwired into us. Some of us will be and some wont. I don't think it can be bred out us.

Why exactly would they want to become a race of hermaphrodites????

 

[Nerys Myk]

You probably can't. So just accept it if it happens.

We accept what the fates hand out to us, if they provide a means of avoiding it we use it however. I can accept a blind child, but it the means to make him see becomes available, then I would use it. The homosexual community exists as a means of coping with a social disadvantage that is handed down to them and that they can't control. If we can avoid having homosexual children, then the homosexual community can't say boo. The blind community can't stop us from curing our blind children if we can, it is the same thing.

Its not a disease or a handicap. Social disadvantages are artificial and can be changed through education and acceptance.

 

[Mars]

You probably can't. So just accept it if it happens.

We accept what the fates hand out to us, if they provide a means of avoiding it we use it however. I can accept a blind child, but it the means to make him see becomes available, then I would use it. The homosexual community exists as a means of coping with a social disadvantage that is handed down to them and that they can't control. If we can avoid having homosexual children, then the homosexual community can't say boo. The blind community can't stop us from curing our blind children if we can, it is the same thing.

Its not a disease or a handicap. Social disadvantages are artificial and can be changed through education and acceptance.

You can generate some degree of acceptance, but their will always be friction, mostly because a homosexual has to wade through a sea of Heterosexuals to find another one like themselves. A gay man looks like a straight man and visa versa. If someone for some reason wears a pink tie and is assumed to be a homosexual by a gay person and is not, then some social friction is created when he winks at him or tries to ask him out on a date.

 

[IndyJones]

You can generate some degree of acceptance, but their will always be friction, mostly because a homosexual has to wade through a sea of Heterosexuals to find another one like themselves. A gay man looks like a straight man and visa versa. If someone for some reason wears a pink tie and is assumed to be a homosexual by a gay person and is not, then some social friction is created when he winks at him or tries to ask him out on a date.

As a gay man, I've never had that problem.

BTW: Am I supposed to be specifically attracted to guys in pink ties. [Chandler] Could you *be* any more stereotypical in what you expect from gays? [/Chandler]

 

[Mars]

You do realize that gays and lesbians can have natural offspring. They have all the working parts for reproduction.

By your logic I should have been given to left-handed parents at birth to be raise "properly".

Who cares about what fictional aliens can and can't do?

Gays and lesbians can have children if they force themselves to, it would be going against their inclinations, but even if they did, their children would probably stand no greater chance of being homosexual than anyone else's, so by having children, they do not perpetuate the homosexual community. If by some 24th century magic they tried to make their children homosexual, they might as well become a separate race of hemaphodites so they can perpetuate themselves without medical intervention.

What inclination prevents homosexuals from wanting to having children???? "Force" them selves????? I don't think being Gay or Lesbian turns off the desire for children.

Being homosexual is hardwired into us. Some of us will be and some wont. I don't think it can be bred out us.

Why exactly would they want to become a race of hermaphrodites????

They won't perpetuate the homosexual community by having children, they rely on others to do that. Homosexuals come out to a fixed percentage of the total population, if that population rises so does the population of homosexuals, and if it falls then so to proportionally does the homosexual community. Unless of course the root cause is discovered and something can be done to prevent it, so far that something doesn't exist, but who knows what the next 300 years will bring.

 

[Mars]

You can generate some degree of acceptance, but their will always be friction, mostly because a homosexual has to wade through a sea of Heterosexuals to find another one like themselves. A gay man looks like a straight man and visa versa. If someone for some reason wears a pink tie and is assumed to be a homosexual by a gay person and is not, then some social friction is created when he winks at him or tries to ask him out on a date.

As a gay man, I've never had that problem.

BTW: Am I supposed to be specifically attracted to guys in pink ties. [Chandler] Could you *be* any more stereotypical in what you expect from gays? [/Chandler]

Well how do you pick out the homosexual guy then? You might be attracted to someone and it turns out he's not homosexual like you, getting to that other homosexual is a problem, because most heterosexual guys don't like to be hit upon by other guys.

I could be attracted to a lesbian, and when I find that out, then there are 10 other women who aren't lesbians, for homosexuals its harder.