Should homosexuals procreate?

[manifold]

Disclaimer: I'm asking this purely from a philosophical standpoint. If we had a philosophy forum I would've put it there. I would prefer to keep religion and law out of this discussion, so both of those forums are out.

It is a given that homosexuality has been observed in the animal kingdom and most reasonable people accept that by and large homosexuals, both human and animal, are born that way. That is to say their attraction to their own sex is neither a choice, nor is it a product of their environment. I've also heard many people, most recently KittyKoder, suggest that it's a natural mechanism for keeping populations in check. Personally, I think this is a very reasonable hypothesis. And that's what led me to ask the philosophical question, should homosexuals procreate? If it truly is nature's population control mechanism, then isn't that just another way of nature saying this is the end of the line for this genetic combination? Of course we know that existing technology enables us to circumvent nature's intent in this case, but just because we can, does that make it a good idea?

 

[Sunni Man]

No way !!

Homos should be rounded up and locked away in mental institutions to recieve treatment.

The ones who are diseased or infected, should never be released into the public.

 

[Silence]

well if, as you say homosexuality is nature's way of saying these people shouldn't have children, one could logically assume that infertility is also natures way of saying those people shouldn't have children, right?

If a homosexual is willing and able to make the commitment of having a biological child then I see nothing to say it's wrong.

Children deserve to be brought into a loving, nuturing environment...regardless of the parents sexual orientation.

 

[Ravi]

Wow. Just wow.

I'll check Mein Kampf and see what Adolf had to say about the subject.

 

[Shogun]

I have no problem with gays being allowed to adopt or raise kids that they crated via sexual procreation.


Just wait until it's possible to clone humans for infertile heteros and gays.

 

[-Cp]

Disclaimer: I'm asking this purely from a philosophical standpoint. If we had a philosophy forum I would've put it there. I would prefer to keep religion and law out of this discussion, so both of those forums are out.

It is a given that homosexuality has been observed in the animal kingdom and most reasonable people accept that by and large homosexuals, both human and animal, are born that way. That is to say their attraction to their own sex is neither a choice, nor is it a product of their environment. I've also heard many people, most recently KittyKoder, suggest that it's a natural mechanism for keeping populations in check. Personally, I think this is a very reasonable hypothesis. And that's what led me to ask the philosophical question, should homosexuals procreate? If it truly is nature's population control mechanism, then isn't that just another way of nature saying this is the end of the line for this genetic combination? Of course we know that existing technology enables us to circumvent nature's intent in this case, but just because we can, does that make it a good idea?

Can you please provide some links showing that homosexuality has been observed in animals?

Besides, isn't man supposedly smarter than animals? THEN WHY THE HELL compare ourselves to them? LOL!

 

[manifold]

well if, as you say homosexuality is nature's way of saying these people shouldn't have children, one could logically assume that infertility is also natures way of saying those people shouldn't have children, right?

I didn't "say" anything, I merely asked a question. Fox News aren't the only one's that can do that you know.

But I agree, if it's true about homosexuality, it's true about infertility too.

If a homosexual is willing and able to make the commitment of having a biological child then I see nothing to say it's wrong.

Does that mean you dismiss the population control hypothesis?

Children deserve to be brought into a loving, nuturing environment...regardless of the parents sexual orientation.

Of course they do. But this has absolutely nothing to do with the question.

 

[manifold]

I have no problem with gays being allowed to adopt or raise kids that they crated via sexual procreation.

But you do have a problem with them using artificial insemination?

 

[Shogun]

But you do have a problem with them using artificial insemination?

as long as the process is done by doctors who are not pressured into doing it despite their personal views I don't. If a gay friendly doc wants to provide gays with artificial insemination then so be it.

 

[random3434]

No way !!

Homos should be rounded up and locked away in mental institutions to recieve treatment.

The ones who are diseased or infected, should never be released into the public.

That's funny, I feel the same about homophobobics!

 

[Stoner]

homosexuals, both human and animal, are born that way.

100% incorrect. Being gay is a choice. People are born heterosexual. Those who become gay choose to do so (usually due to abuse, mental issues, lack of acceptance, etc...).

Anyone who thinks people are born gay needs to have their noggin examined.

 

[Shogun]

Or, in your case, go back to school and learn what a genetic predisposition is.

Your post is stupid on many, MANY levels.

 

[CA95380]

I, personally, think this is a legit question. Having one of our three children that was gay ..... once again I say .... I still don't understand the "lifestyle", and never will.

I remember years ago trying to find answers. The "lifestyle" not only goes back to Bibical days (I know you did not want this to be classified as such -sorry), but I often wondered about African Tribes that are totally out of the loop with the "civilized" population .... and gay people are/were found there too.

Africa
Though often ignored or suppressed by European explorers and colonialists, homosexual expression in native Africa was also present and took a variety of forms. Anthropologists Stephen Murray and Will Roscoe reported that women in Lesotho engaged in socially sanctioned "long term, erotic relationships," named motsoalle.[30] E. E. Evans-Pritchard also recorded that male Azande warriors (in the northern Congo) routinely took on boy-wives between the ages of twelve and twenty, who helped with household tasks and participated in intercrural sex with their older husbands. The practice had died out by the early 20th century, after Europeans had gained control of African countries, but was recounted to Evans-Pritchard by the elders he spoke to.

Homosexuality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This might be off topic and some of you do not seem to like reference to wikipedia - but it covers what I am adding, pretty dang good. As far as your question? I do not have an answer, nor an opinion.

 

[nukeman]

Disclaimer: I'm asking this purely from a philosophical standpoint. If we had a philosophy forum I would've put it there. I would prefer to keep religion and law out of this discussion, so both of those forums are out.

It is a given that homosexuality has been observed in the animal kingdom and most reasonable people accept that by and large homosexuals, both human and animal, are born that way. That is to say their attraction to their own sex is neither a choice, nor is it a product of their environment. I've also heard many people, most recently KittyKoder, suggest that it's a natural mechanism for keeping populations in check. Personally, I think this is a very reasonable hypothesis. And that's what led me to ask the philosophical question, should homosexuals procreate? If it truly is nature's population control mechanism, then isn't that just another way of nature saying this is the end of the line for this genetic combination? Of course we know that existing technology enables us to circumvent nature's intent in this case, but just because we can, does that make it a good idea?

If they can do it in the normal manner than by all means, If not than they shouldn't be procreating!!!!!

 

[Ravi]

Seriously, I don't really buy that gay people exist as a form of population control. Obviously gay people still wish to procreate. People that don't wish to procreate would more likely exist as a form of population control.

 

[random3434]

Seriously, I don't really buy that gay people exist as a form of population control. Obviously gay people still wish to procreate. People that don't wish to procreate would more likely exist as a form of population control.

I have several straight friends that don't want to procreate. What does that mean I wonder?

 

[Ravi]

I have several straight friends that don't want to procreate. What does that mean I wonder?

Better vacation options.

 

[random3434]

Better vacation options.

True dat.

My friend Cindy is always hopping around the country to this or that place.

I'm like, "Well, I went to Target last night!"

 

[jla1178]

I say, "put a gay man and a lesbian together in a room and let them have at it." God bless America!!!

 

[random3434]

I say, "put a gay man and a lesbian together in a room and let them have at it." God bless America!!!

Or David Crosby!