GAYS and LESBIANS, leading the way into the FUTURE of PARENTING

[mekannik]

RyanH
the title of your thread insinuates that ALL gays and lesbians make poor parents. Your newsclipping is unfortunate, but a million more abusive incidents can be found to exist with children of straight parents as well.

Let's see - the title insinuates because you assumed I meant ALL. Much like some of your threads implicate ALL conservatives and ALL flaming heterosexuals. Good try - I'll try preaching into the mirror like you next time.

Now as for "abusive incidents"... WHAT? I said "abusive incidents"... WHAT? This is clearly an article written about and my observations/feelings regarding genetic manipulation of one's offspring. While one might be able to extrapolate the "engineering" of a handicap as abuse - I have not stated it as such. Merely that I condemn the act of two people (AND AS i STATED EARLIER - [MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ EARLIER RESPONSES IN THREADS] - I WOULD CONDEMN ANYONE WHO WOULD COMMIT SUCH AN ACT, BE THEY STRAIGHT, GAY, ALBINO, etc), nothing more, nothing less.


The fact that such a reprehensible act was committed by two lesbians (which I believe would come under one of your earlier threads covering gay parents being a better child rearing unit) must get under your skin.

Don't fear Ryan - I don't hate gays, lesbians, albinos, wiggers.... I just hate assholes. (no sexual innuendo intended)

 

[musclebrains]

Hello? You did say "Gays and Lesbians, leading the way into the future of parenting." It was certainly fair to conclude you were making a general statement about the population you mentioned -- especially since there were no "gays" involved in teh particular incident.

Nice try, but give us a break.

 

[mekannik]

danielson
i remember seeing a program years ago about a heterosexual couple who said they wanted their child to be deaf because they were for much the same reasons, they dont see it as a handicap.

now if they were to have a child, would it be any more or less acceptable?

Please see the second half on my response to Ryan. PLEASE REVIEW SOME OF THE THE EARLIER RESPONSES IN THIS THREAD. I would condemn anyone for "designing" their child. ANYONE.

Add in the fact that someone from the American National Association for the Deaf is appalled - doesn't that tell you something?

danielson
should his genetic makeup be used to prejudice his right to help other procreate? when a couple chooses a donor, one of the things they select is genetic traits/makeup....should this be any different? remember the child wasnt guaranteed to be deaf. how could you prove there werent other reasons for him being the donor

You are correct. The "genetic counsellor" said there would be a 50% chance of the child being deaf. DAMNIT. What were they paying for?!?! If I can't get 100% deaf, I'm walking.

But don't you think it a bit odd that most (most) donors are screened out for deafness. Not necessarily a trait that an unsuspecting mother would like a 50% chance of happening.


This does raise the interesting point that whenever a couple (ANY couple) chooses to have a baby - they are in a round about way - conducting genetic manipulation. Two blondes will typically have a blonde baby. Tall people, tall kids (although dwarfs have produced "normal" sized children). Although I am in a real jam in regards to my offspring (should I ever choose to reproduce) - I have red hair, a recessive gene, which in all likely hood will be passed on, but dominated by a dark hair gene fairly easily.

Shouldn't I get preferential treatment in choosing who would get my sperm?

 

[mekannik]

musclebrains
Hello? You did say "Gays and Lesbians, leading the way into the future of parenting." It was certainly fair to conclude you were making a general statement about the population you mentioned -- especially since there were no "gays" involved in teh particular incident.

Nice try, but give us a break.

So you are not including lesbians at your gay tea party? Sounds a bit prejudice to me.
Good-bye.

 

[musclebrains]

So you are not including lesbians at your gay tea party? Sounds a bit prejudice to me.
Good-bye.

Uhhhhhh. Try again.

 

[danielson]

Please see the second half on my response to Ryan. PLEASE REVIEW SOME OF THE THE EARLIER RESPONSES IN THIS THREAD. I would condemn anyone for "designing" their child. ANYONE.

Add in the fact that someone from the American National Association for the Deaf is appalled - doesn't that tell you something?

yes, that they are assholes for wanting to bring a child intothe world that is deaf, when they had the unique option to bring one into the world that wasnt, and wouldnt make a shred of difference to them, other than show they want a child that 'understands them'

maybeb they feklt as deaf people they were unsuited to bringing up a fully able child, as it would create difficulties. maybe but then i would think this is a good reason for them not to have children

HOWEVER this is just my personal opinion.....

But don't you think it a bit odd that most (most) donors are screened out for deafness. Not necessarily a trait that an unsuspecting mother would like a 50% chance of happening.


This does raise the interesting point that whenever a couple (ANY couple) chooses to have a baby - they are in a round about way - conducting genetic manipulation. Two blondes will typically have a blonde baby. Tall people, tall kids (although dwarfs have produced "normal" sized children). Although I am in a real jam in regards to my offspring (should I ever choose to reproduce) - I have red hair, a recessive gene, which in all likely hood will be passed on, but dominated by a dark hair gene fairly easily.

Shouldn't I get preferential treatment in choosing who would get my sperm?

this is my point- can we refuse to let a couple choose sperm that has a genetic defect? do we have that right to discriminate

if a heterosexual deaf couple reproduced, we could hypothetically screen the child/foetus genetically, and if it was deaf, abort it and start again until we got one that could hear

should we make this manditory? is this any different to refusing a deaf persons sperm? if 2 jewish people can repoduce due tp physicl problems and upon screening they are bothj carriers for tay-sachs should we let them? is this any different?

 

[mekannik]

this is my point- can we refuse to let a couple choose sperm that has a genetic defect? do we have that right to discriminate

if a heterosexual deaf couple reproduced, we could hypothetically screen the child/foetus genetically, and if it was deaf, abort it and start again until we got one that could hear

should we make this manditory? is this any different to refusing a deaf persons sperm? if 2 jewish people can repoduce due tp physicl problems and upon screening they are bothj carriers for tay-sachs should we let them? is this any different?

Danielson, I believe we are approaching this argument in the same direction, just different paths. You backed my point up of a couple reproducing and rolling the dice with their genetic material. Good, poor, whatever (BTW - whose to judge?)...

However - this article shows a lesbian couple, unable of reproducing on their own - making a conscientious decision to bring about a child in a predetermined condition. There is no similarity between what this couple did VS. a heterosexual couple having sex to reproduce and taking the results.