Gay reproduction (M/M and F/F)

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,032
Points
280
Location
Earth
I first heard about this on an episode of "Through The Wormhole." Looking into it, I found this:

Sexual Reproduction for Same Sex Couples | The Chromosome Chronicles

"One of the common arguments against gay marriage goes something like this: marriage is an institution that is meant to support reproduction, and same-sex couples can’t sexually reproduce. Full disclosure: I support gay marriage. However, regardless of my opinion, this entry will help debunk this specific argument. More importantly, I will outline three important discoveries that will one day allow same sex couples to have biological children that are purely made from their genes...

...These three techniques, once perfected will lead to the ability for male/male and female/female couples to have biological children, children who are a combination of their own genes."


Still theoretical, but everything's theoretical until somoene does it.
 

NLT

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2011
Messages
32,101
Reaction score
6,771
Points
1,170
Is your asshole going to be the birth canal?
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,107
Reaction score
10,441
Points
2,040
I first heard about this on an episode of "Through The Wormhole." Looking into it, I found this:

Sexual Reproduction for Same Sex Couples | The Chromosome Chronicles

"One of the common arguments against gay marriage goes something like this: marriage is an institution that is meant to support reproduction, and same-sex couples can’t sexually reproduce. Full disclosure: I support gay marriage. However, regardless of my opinion, this entry will help debunk this specific argument. More importantly, I will outline three important discoveries that will one day allow same sex couples to have biological children that are purely made from their genes...

...These three techniques, once perfected will lead to the ability for male/male and female/female couples to have biological children, children who are a combination of their own genes."


Still theoretical, but everything's theoretical until somoene does it.
Its less sexual reproduction and more splicing. It still doesnt eliminate the fact that biologically same sex relations just dont make any sense. Its not a judgement on the moral implications of allowing them, simply that they really dont jive with nature, i.e. the progression and promotion of ones genome.
 

novasteve

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
8,578
Reaction score
859
Points
245
Location
Bellevue
And non fags only use science to reproduce when there is something wrong with them
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,032
Points
280
Location
Earth
I first heard about this on an episode of "Through The Wormhole." Looking into it, I found this:

Sexual Reproduction for Same Sex Couples | The Chromosome Chronicles

"One of the common arguments against gay marriage goes something like this: marriage is an institution that is meant to support reproduction, and same-sex couples can’t sexually reproduce. Full disclosure: I support gay marriage. However, regardless of my opinion, this entry will help debunk this specific argument. More importantly, I will outline three important discoveries that will one day allow same sex couples to have biological children that are purely made from their genes...

...These three techniques, once perfected will lead to the ability for male/male and female/female couples to have biological children, children who are a combination of their own genes."


Still theoretical, but everything's theoretical until somoene does it.
Its less sexual reproduction and more splicing. It still doesnt eliminate the fact that biologically same sex relations just dont make any sense. Its not a judgement on the moral implications of allowing them, simply that they really dont jive with nature, i.e. the progression and promotion of ones genome.
Reproduction's reproduction. No one asks a person how they were born. And your same arguement could be leveled at IVF.
 

novasteve

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
8,578
Reaction score
859
Points
245
Location
Bellevue
I first heard about this on an episode of "Through The Wormhole." Looking into it, I found this:

Sexual Reproduction for Same Sex Couples | The Chromosome Chronicles

"One of the common arguments against gay marriage goes something like this: marriage is an institution that is meant to support reproduction, and same-sex couples can’t sexually reproduce. Full disclosure: I support gay marriage. However, regardless of my opinion, this entry will help debunk this specific argument. More importantly, I will outline three important discoveries that will one day allow same sex couples to have biological children that are purely made from their genes...

...These three techniques, once perfected will lead to the ability for male/male and female/female couples to have biological children, children who are a combination of their own genes."


Still theoretical, but everything's theoretical until somoene does it.
Its less sexual reproduction and more splicing. It still doesnt eliminate the fact that biologically same sex relations just dont make any sense. Its not a judgement on the moral implications of allowing them, simply that they really dont jive with nature, i.e. the progression and promotion of ones genome.
Reproduction's reproduction. No one asks a person how they were born. And your same arguement could be leveled at IVF.
There's something wrong with people who use ivf. A medical issue. There's no medical issue with Fags not being able to reproduce with each other.
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,032
Points
280
Location
Earth
So we shouldn't remove appendixes or tonsils? They're natural parts of the body, and most people's work fine. Never had either of mine removed. But because we can, sometimes we do.

Just because gays can't reproduce naturally, does that mean if the technology came to exist enabling them to do so it shouldn't be used? Can offer an opinion on this either way, I wont judge you. Judge you on other things already. :)
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,107
Reaction score
10,441
Points
2,040
I first heard about this on an episode of "Through The Wormhole." Looking into it, I found this:

Sexual Reproduction for Same Sex Couples | The Chromosome Chronicles

"One of the common arguments against gay marriage goes something like this: marriage is an institution that is meant to support reproduction, and same-sex couples can’t sexually reproduce. Full disclosure: I support gay marriage. However, regardless of my opinion, this entry will help debunk this specific argument. More importantly, I will outline three important discoveries that will one day allow same sex couples to have biological children that are purely made from their genes...

...These three techniques, once perfected will lead to the ability for male/male and female/female couples to have biological children, children who are a combination of their own genes."


Still theoretical, but everything's theoretical until somoene does it.
Its less sexual reproduction and more splicing. It still doesnt eliminate the fact that biologically same sex relations just dont make any sense. Its not a judgement on the moral implications of allowing them, simply that they really dont jive with nature, i.e. the progression and promotion of ones genome.
Reproduction's reproduction. No one asks a person how they were born. And your same arguement could be leveled at IVF.
IVF and its ilk still use the same process, they just bring the parts together in a different way. What is being discussed here is melding two genomes without using the original biological pathway.
 

Luddly Neddite

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
63,820
Reaction score
9,870
Points
2,040
Fudge packers are currently able to give birth to mud babies.

But abort them when they flush the toilet. ... :lol:
A lot of so-called "men" are really terrified by homosexuality.

Why don't you all get some counseling, buy your Viagra and mind your own business.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,107
Reaction score
10,441
Points
2,040
So we shouldn't remove appendixes or tonsils? They're natural parts of the body, and most people's work fine. Never had either of mine removed. But because we can, sometimes we do.

Just because gays can't reproduce naturally, does that mean if the technology came to exist enabling them to do so it shouldn't be used? Can offer an opinion on this either way, I wont judge you. Judge you on other things already. :)
The premise of your post is that once technology allows same sex people to reproduce then the argument against it being something "natural" goes away. Since surgery and furthering ones genome are not even in the same area code, never mind ballpark, your point doesnt exactly make much sense.

Our species has a way to keep it going, and it requires a male and a female for it to work, same as all other speicies. Its the natural biological way of doing things. All our technology does currently is modify existing life, not change the way it is initially created.
 

iamwhatiseem

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
25,163
Reaction score
7,301
Points
280
Location
On a hill
What is this Gay Day??
How many homosexual threads are we going to have in a day this week??
Damn
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,032
Points
280
Location
Earth
What is this Gay Day??
How many homosexual threads are we going to have in a day this week??
Damn
Just curious, but did you complain the other day in the thread about the 10 or 11 anti-gay threads too?

Didn't occur to me until your mention of it, but being a big fan of symmetry and balance, if we're gonna have daily anti-gay threads I think an equal number of pro-gay threads is in order.

So all the conservatives and anti-gay folk can thank iamwhatiseem for sparking the idea of balancing out the anti-gay rhetoric. ;)
 
Last edited:

Yurt

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
25,603
Reaction score
3,601
Points
270
Location
Hot air ballon
delta:

what do yo consider natural? man, using science or something else, to change something from it's original form or function? or what?
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,032
Points
280
Location
Earth
Think it depends a bit on the context. Broadly, I'd say anything happening here on planet Earth is natural. Anything off-world is 'extranatural.'

In the case of science enabling something an organism can't do natively, hmm. Have to think about that for a moment. ...We can fly using science though we can't naturally. Probably a ton of things made possible by way of science. On the more human-level, we're now able to restore some causes of people being blind or deaf because of technology. We're making fish flourescent colors splicing their genes, breeding hypoallergenic pets for owners with allergies, curing diseases with medicine, etc.

If we can one day enable gay couples to reproduce I have no objection. Could frankly give a poop what other people do reproductively.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,107
Reaction score
10,441
Points
2,040
Think it depends a bit on the context. Broadly, I'd say anything happening here on planet Earth is natural. Anything off-world is 'extranatural.'

In the case of science enabling something an organism can't do natively, hmm. Have to think about that for a moment. ...We can fly using science though we can't naturally. Probably a ton of things made possible by way of science. On the more human-level, we're now able to restore some causes of people being blind or deaf because of technology. We're making fish flourescent colors splicing their genes, breeding hypoallergenic pets for owners with allergies, curing diseases with medicine, etc.

If we can one day enable gay couples to reproduce I have no objection. Could frankly give a poop what other people do reproductively.
In all those other cases if we lose our technology the species will continue. for the case of M/M F/F reproduction this is not the case.
 

novasteve

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
8,578
Reaction score
859
Points
245
Location
Bellevue
Do the taxpayers get ton pay for this or have the cost passed onto the other insured people ?
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top