Abortion

[Bobin]

If scientists ever find a genetic basis for homosexuality, ie., a "gay gene", genetic testing would be able to uncover it in the fetus. Once the gay gene is found, all homosexuals will then, overnight, be against abortion.

[Fred75]

Women have abortions mainly since another wud get in the way of important things like taking care of there family , going to school, and
work .Money is often a factor too.

To moi and about everyone else I know who has had one it's the lesser of two evils . A real horrible regret but the only realistic thing you could do .

The lesser of evil would have been not to spread your legs outside a committed relationship.

You wanted to get laid and cared little that it would cost a child it's life.

[The Colonel]

If scientists ever find a genetic basis for homosexuality, ie., a "gay gene", genetic testing would be able to uncover it in the fetus. Once the gay gene is found, all homosexuals will then, overnight, be against abortion.

Most are as it happens.

Plus any civilised nation would make such a test illegal.

[noodles]

If scientists ever find a genetic basis for homosexuality, ie., a "gay gene", genetic testing would be able to uncover it in the fetus. Once the gay gene is found, all homosexuals will then, overnight, be against abortion.

Don't talk shite.

[Sharon den Adel]

If scientists ever find a genetic basis for homosexuality, ie., a "gay gene", genetic testing would be able to uncover it in the fetus. Once the gay gene is found, all homosexuals will then, overnight, be against abortion.

And all the *cough* religious people *cough* will eithor abort that child, or mentally prepare themselves for the brainwashing that lies ahead...

[Fred75]

If scientists ever find a genetic basis for homosexuality, ie., a "gay gene", genetic testing would be able to uncover it in the fetus. Once the gay gene is found, all homosexuals will then, overnight, be against abortion.

Most are as it happens.

Plus any civilised nation would make such a test illegal.

Theres nothing illegal about removing a bunch of cells that are not alive or a child.
It's done every day in LEGAL abortion clinics around the FREE SECULAR WORLD!
So removing "gay" cells is no different than removing a tumor.

[Bobin]

now i have to wonder that, if they did identify a "gay gene", whether the parents would have the gene spliced out and replaced with a heterosexual gene. that would be entirely possible if they did find it. after all, they aren't mapping all these genes just for fun.

[Fred75]

now i have to wonder that, if they did identify a "gay gene", whether the parents would have the gene spliced out and replaced with a heterosexual gene. that would be entirely possible if they did find it. after all, they aren't mapping all these genes just for fun.

Too expensive!

Best thing is go to your local SECULAR FREE WORLD ABORTION CLINIC and have the defective lump of cells sucked out and washed down the sink.
It's not alive so it's perfectly LEGAL.
Secular science tells us so!

[Bobin]

Don't talk shite.

i'm not i'm just thinking about this.

eventually where genetic science will end up is to the point that you will be able to splice in desirable characteristics and splice out undesirable characteristics in the gene set. this has already been done to plants and other animals. those vegatables in your refirgerator are all genetically modified. if you think it will not happen to humans, it might be a good idea to think about it some more.

what is worse is that when this does happen, it will create a rift in society. the division would be naturally conceived people vs. modified people. the issue would also arise as to what is legal to spilce in or out and what is not. suppose they found a gene related to orgasm intensity? one parent would say give johnny all the orgasm genes you can find. if they found a gene associated with intelligence, another parent will want that one spliced in. how about athletic performance? or longevity? what we will end up with is a government that will attempt to regulate genetic modification. this amounts to nothing more than categorizing what is a legal vs. illegal gene set. in doing do, we have essentially defined what is a legal and illegal person. that, in itself, is very scarey. so, rather than stating that a particular personality trait is illegal, the government will state that splicing the gene in for that trait is illegal.

personally, i am not in favor of abortion. more importantly, however, i am not in favor of any government legislating morality. morality simply cannot be legislated. whenever morality has been legislated, it fails.

hmmm, maybe i'm an illegal person according to laws that haven't been written yet i'm sure some people, by now, think i'm crazy. craziness is not illegal (yet).

[Bobin]

The ass isnt designed to have a C*** shoved up it.
That's what a vagina is for!

this is a iron-clad statement that is based upon the principles of biology, anatomy and physiology, and cannot be refuted by any logical argument.

[Fred75]

The ass isnt designed to have a C*** shoved up it.
That's what a vagina is for!

this is a iron-clad statement that is based upon the principles of biology, anatomy and physiology, and cannot be refuted by any logical argument.

True.
The vagina is a self lubricating orifice for sex.
The S*** hole is made up of thin membranes that can easily tear and bleed and does not self lubricate. Unless the guy has the squirts.

[Bobin]

The vagina is a self lubricating orifice for sex.
The S*** hole is made up of thin membranes that can easily tear and bleed and does not self lubricate. Unless the guy has the squirts.

let me look that up in one of my medical texts....

yep. right again. indisputable.

[Fred75]

The vagina is a self lubricating orifice for sex.
The S*** hole is made up of thin membranes that can easily tear and bleed and does not self lubricate. Unless the guy has the squirts.

let me look that up in one of my medical texts....

yep. right again. indisputable.

Thank you.
I was concerned about the proper medical term.
I am glad "the squirts" was correct.

[The Colonel]

Don't talk shite.

i'm not i'm just thinking about this.

eventually where genetic science will end up is to the point that you will be able to splice in desirable characteristics and splice out undesirable characteristics in the gene set. this has already been done to plants and other animals. those vegatables in your refirgerator are all genetically modified. if you think it will not happen to humans, it might be a good idea to think about it some more.

what is worse is that when this does happen, it will create a rift in society. the division would be naturally conceived people vs. modified people. the issue would also arise as to what is legal to spilce in or out and what is not. suppose they found a gene related to orgasm intensity? one parent would say give johnny all the orgasm genes you can find. if they found a gene associated with intelligence, another parent will want that one spliced in. how about athletic performance? or longevity? what we will end up with is a government that will attempt to regulate genetic modification. this amounts to nothing more than categorizing what is a legal vs. illegal gene set. in doing do, we have essentially defined what is a legal and illegal person. that, in itself, is very scarey. so, rather than stating that a particular personality trait is illegal, the government will state that splicing the gene in for that trait is illegal.

personally, i am not in favor of abortion. more importantly, however, i am not in favor of any government legislating morality. morality simply cannot be legislated. whenever morality has been legislated, it fails.

hmmm, maybe i'm an illegal person according to laws that haven't been written yet i'm sure some people, by now, think i'm crazy. craziness is not illegal (yet).

Looks like we have another homophobe on the forum.

[Bobin]

Fred,

so then, it is biology, and not religion, that determines the normal biological function of the penis and vagina ?

in other words, it is religion that follows and agrees with biological function, not the other way around. would you agree?