Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsThursday, October 29, 2009
Homo A Novel New Argument Against Gay Marriage
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:15 AM
The Rev. Walter E. Fauntroy, Washington D.C.'s first delegate to Congress, who spoke against marriage equality at a contentious hearing earlier this week, had this to say to the Washington Post:
"I have some brilliant friends who are gay, and it bothers me that they're not going to pass those genes on."
I'm sure your gay friends, who can pass their genes on now by doing surrogacy or co-parenting with lesbians, appreciate your concern for their DNA, Rev. Fauntroy. But gay people who can't legally marry each other typically don't marry opposite-sex partners instead. We're still going to fuck each other and shack up with each other and we're starting families with each other even in the absence of legal marriage rights. And we really shouldn't be encouraged to marry opposite-sex partners for the sake of appearances or to pass on our genes. Am I right, Mrs. Craig? Can I get an amen, Mrs. Haggard? Care to share your feelings on the subject, Mrs. McGreevey?
1
Who are these brilliant gay friends he supposedly has? How do they feel about their "friend" testifying against their humanity?
2
Wow. Pure stupidity.
So I'm married to a man, and I get this kind of argument sometimes too, from friends or family members who don't understand why we don't want to procreate. I'd apparently be a great mom, and we're both smart, so it bothers people that we're not passing on our genes. It doesn't seem to bother them that neither of us has any interest in being parents, but doesn't it seem like our lack of interest would make for very unhappy and badly-raised kids?
And yes, I realize our marriage should not be legal, since we're not breeding.
So I'm married to a man, and I get this kind of argument sometimes too, from friends or family members who don't understand why we don't want to procreate. I'd apparently be a great mom, and we're both smart, so it bothers people that we're not passing on our genes. It doesn't seem to bother them that neither of us has any interest in being parents, but doesn't it seem like our lack of interest would make for very unhappy and badly-raised kids?
And yes, I realize our marriage should not be legal, since we're not breeding.
3
That's interesting. Still, how does that have any bearing, they can choose to pass their genes on if they wish. Thank heaven, my husband's birth mom did, or my life would look just a bit different.
4
Wow, an argument that totally misses the point.
Rather than being "bothered" that his "brilliant friends who are gay" won't be able to "pass those genes on", he should be more concerned that his "brilliant friends" can't pass on and share their knowledge and resources with a child that they and their same-sex partner could adopt and raise, but are prevented to fully doing so because their relationship is not recognized as a marriage (with all of the legal rights that status confers) under the law. Not to mention all the other legal rights that are denied couples because their relationships are judged to be separate and unequal due to prejudice and unfounded fears.
Some "friend" he is.
Rather than being "bothered" that his "brilliant friends who are gay" won't be able to "pass those genes on", he should be more concerned that his "brilliant friends" can't pass on and share their knowledge and resources with a child that they and their same-sex partner could adopt and raise, but are prevented to fully doing so because their relationship is not recognized as a marriage (with all of the legal rights that status confers) under the law. Not to mention all the other legal rights that are denied couples because their relationships are judged to be separate and unequal due to prejudice and unfounded fears.
Some "friend" he is.
5
Wow, an argument that totally misses the point.
Rather than being "bothered" that his "brilliant friends who are gay" won't be able to "pass those genes on", he should be more concerned that his "brilliant friends" can't pass on and share their knowledge and resources with a child that they and their same-sex partner could adopt and raise, but are prevented to fully doing so because their relationship is not recognized as a marriage (with all of the legal rights that status confers) under the law. Not to mention all the other legal rights that are denied couples because their relationships are judged to be separate and unequal due to prejudice and unfounded fears.
Some "friend" he is.
Rather than being "bothered" that his "brilliant friends who are gay" won't be able to "pass those genes on", he should be more concerned that his "brilliant friends" can't pass on and share their knowledge and resources with a child that they and their same-sex partner could adopt and raise, but are prevented to fully doing so because their relationship is not recognized as a marriage (with all of the legal rights that status confers) under the law. Not to mention all the other legal rights that are denied couples because their relationships are judged to be separate and unequal due to prejudice and unfounded fears.
Some "friend" he is.
7
My kid has 50% of his genes, for better or for worse, from me, thank you very much.
I guess the ignorant Rev. Fauntroy needs to make friends with me.
I guess the ignorant Rev. Fauntroy needs to make friends with me.
8
Uh, actually, typically gays *have* run off and married opposite sex partners if you have a look at history. They've passed on their genes in marriages while having secret same-sex lovers on the side. Not saying that it's better, but it *is* a fact that when gays were more closeted, their genes were getting passed more than they are now. Surrogacy is rather infrequent compared to closeted gay parents who reproduce.
9
Tell me again what procreation has to do with marriage? Because I'm a goddamn genius and my husband and I don't have kids.
11
Distorting statements, as always. It's very clear that he was expressing his concern that if societal approval of gay marriage was enshrined into law the wrong message would be sent to the community and others comming after might also end up following the same difficult path as some friends of his have. It might not matter much in certain communities but in those of color renewal is of great importance, without it we desist to exist. You mr Savage are incapable of ever understanding that.
12
@9: My wife and I are also married non-procreators so I don't get the connection either. But, then again, we aren't that brilliant so failing to pass our genes alongs isn't that great a loss to humanity. ;>).
13
@8
Of course that's true, but what does it have to do with whether or not a person should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex? (I'm seriously asking, am I missing something?)
Of course that's true, but what does it have to do with whether or not a person should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex? (I'm seriously asking, am I missing something?)
14
LC: You can't cite our "difficult path" as a reason not to come out when you're the ones—you and your ilk—making that path so difficult. That's like an anti-semite saying. "Gee, are you sure you wanna be Jewish, what with all these pogroms? Kind of a difficult path, am I right?"
15
"those of color renewal is of great importance, without it we desist to exist."
Is that why you think miscegenation should be illegal? Interesting, never thought of it that way.
Is that why you think miscegenation should be illegal? Interesting, never thought of it that way.
16
@11: So you profess to Dan that he will never understand a community he isn't a part of, but then you preach on and on about the gay community. Unless...
Wait, so you're a lesbian? Oh my!
Wait, so you're a lesbian? Oh my!
17
@4 says it best.
@11 - how are these statements distorting? Your reading of what Fantroy said sounds more like a distortion or imposition of interpretation to me. He is using the desperate argument that same-sex marriage is going to disable the passage of his gay friends' favorable genes (a questionable assertion for several reasons, including the fact his friends can pass their genes along via surrogacy, the whole nature vs. nurture question, and the whole question of how intrusive government should be in regulating reproductive choices between consenting adults, etc.) AND that same-sex marriage will have such a widespread effect of deflating the birth rate that our survival as a species (a species, not certain communities of color -- I'm African American, by the way, and my concerns related to my community have much more to do with economics and institutionalized racism than same-sex marriage) is at stake. Really? Are you really going to defend that argument? Good luck.
@11 - how are these statements distorting? Your reading of what Fantroy said sounds more like a distortion or imposition of interpretation to me. He is using the desperate argument that same-sex marriage is going to disable the passage of his gay friends' favorable genes (a questionable assertion for several reasons, including the fact his friends can pass their genes along via surrogacy, the whole nature vs. nurture question, and the whole question of how intrusive government should be in regulating reproductive choices between consenting adults, etc.) AND that same-sex marriage will have such a widespread effect of deflating the birth rate that our survival as a species (a species, not certain communities of color -- I'm African American, by the way, and my concerns related to my community have much more to do with economics and institutionalized racism than same-sex marriage) is at stake. Really? Are you really going to defend that argument? Good luck.
18
Fortunately, gay people can pass on their genes if they choose, without the messy marriage to an opposite sex breeder. Isn't that what Melissa Etheridge did?
19
@8: It may be true that during earlier times gays were more likely to marry and/or reproduce with opposite-sex partners due to societal pressures/legal sanctions against homosexuality. But do you think those homes, those families were always the best places to raise a child in? All the anti-gay marriage folks claim to be in this for the children, and yet they reject the possibility that a stable same-sex relationship (two parents) could be better than a dysfunctional opposite-sex relatioship. The health of the parents' relationship, regardless of whether they are two men, two women, or a man and a woman, should be the concern here, not the obsession with their gender.
20
The gay community is doing the over populated earth a huge favour by not having children! And all gay people come from straight parents so why is he going on about genes? And doesn't people like him believe that being gay is a choice? He can't have it both ways. Make up your mind already!
21
These days, if you're going to hate in public, you have to twist yourself into a pretzel to sound like you're loving. This is why the Rev. Fauntroy ends up sounding so stupid.
22
What the writer @11 is terming distortion is actually reasoning and analysis, the output of thinking rather than repeated badly formed, evidence-free, and/or false platitudes.
23
"It might not matter much in certain communities but in those of color renewal is of great importance, without it we desist to exist."
So in communities of color where renewal is of great importance, there would not be any "surplus" kids for adoption by outsiders. Sorry, your point of view is not based in reality.
So in communities of color where renewal is of great importance, there would not be any "surplus" kids for adoption by outsiders. Sorry, your point of view is not based in reality.
24
@ 17
And never get to know the child or be in her/his life if they want to. How is that supposed to edify our community?
Children (especially those in our community) need stable homes, a Mom and a Dad so that not only they're able to pass on their genes but also their culture, sense of worth, their rich and proud history and institute on them strong moral values that can only be provided withing the nuclear family.
So are mine, but I think you're in denial if you believe that the introduction of foreign ideologies in our community have no drastic repercussions that further erode our place in this nation. Just as the introduction (by outside forces) of drugs has had a devastating impact on African American families and communities, so have the attempts of introducing certain sexual practices by those same forces caused further erosion by way of viruses, further disruptions of the black family and if we stand by and let them a decline in the our population's birth rate. Have you read what's out there concerning organizations like planned parenthood? (which, by the way, mr Savage supports). Further diminishing of our population is precisely what some of these people want. You don't need to look any further than the current mentality of our youth, killing each other for nonsense, disregard for their families, and an over-sexualiztion amongst them like we've never seen before. You cannot tell me that the culture that mr Savage promotes is not aiding in some part in it. It might not be the only contributor for our dire situation, but it plays a role, and we just don't need that kind of stuff added to our plate or we will cease to exist as a community.
More...
"his friends can pass their genes along via surrogacy"
And never get to know the child or be in her/his life if they want to. How is that supposed to edify our community?
Children (especially those in our community) need stable homes, a Mom and a Dad so that not only they're able to pass on their genes but also their culture, sense of worth, their rich and proud history and institute on them strong moral values that can only be provided withing the nuclear family.
"my concerns related to my community have much more to do with economics and institutionalized racism"
So are mine, but I think you're in denial if you believe that the introduction of foreign ideologies in our community have no drastic repercussions that further erode our place in this nation. Just as the introduction (by outside forces) of drugs has had a devastating impact on African American families and communities, so have the attempts of introducing certain sexual practices by those same forces caused further erosion by way of viruses, further disruptions of the black family and if we stand by and let them a decline in the our population's birth rate. Have you read what's out there concerning organizations like planned parenthood? (which, by the way, mr Savage supports). Further diminishing of our population is precisely what some of these people want. You don't need to look any further than the current mentality of our youth, killing each other for nonsense, disregard for their families, and an over-sexualiztion amongst them like we've never seen before. You cannot tell me that the culture that mr Savage promotes is not aiding in some part in it. It might not be the only contributor for our dire situation, but it plays a role, and we just don't need that kind of stuff added to our plate or we will cease to exist as a community.
25
@ 17
And never get to know the child or be in her/his life if they want to. How is that supposed to edify our community?
Children (especially those in our community) need stable homes, a Mom and a Dad so that not only they're able to pass on their genes but also their culture, sense of worth, their rich and proud history and institute on them strong moral values that can only be provided withing the nuclear family.
So are mine, but I think you're in denial if you believe that the introduction of foreign ideologies in our community have no drastic repercussions that further erode our place in this nation. Just as the introduction (by outside forces) of drugs has had a devastating impact on African American families and communities, so have the attempts of introducing certain sexual practices by those same forces caused further erosion by way of viruses, further disruptions of the black family and if we stand by and let them a decline in the our population's birth rate. Have you read what's out there concerning organizations like planned parenthood? (which, by the way, mr Savage supports). Further diminishing of our population is precisely what some of these people want. You don't need to look any further than the current mentality of our youth, killing each other for nonsense, disregard for their families, and an over-sexualiztion amongst them like we've never seen before. You cannot tell me that the culture that mr Savage promotes is not aiding in some part in it. It might not be the only contributor for our dire situation, but it plays a role, and we just don't need that kind of stuff added to our plate or we will cease to exist as a community.
More...
"his friends can pass their genes along via surrogacy"
And never get to know the child or be in her/his life if they want to. How is that supposed to edify our community?
Children (especially those in our community) need stable homes, a Mom and a Dad so that not only they're able to pass on their genes but also their culture, sense of worth, their rich and proud history and institute on them strong moral values that can only be provided withing the nuclear family.
"my concerns related to my community have much more to do with economics and institutionalized racism"
So are mine, but I think you're in denial if you believe that the introduction of foreign ideologies in our community have no drastic repercussions that further erode our place in this nation. Just as the introduction (by outside forces) of drugs has had a devastating impact on African American families and communities, so have the attempts of introducing certain sexual practices by those same forces caused further erosion by way of viruses, further disruptions of the black family and if we stand by and let them a decline in the our population's birth rate. Have you read what's out there concerning organizations like planned parenthood? (which, by the way, mr Savage supports). Further diminishing of our population is precisely what some of these people want. You don't need to look any further than the current mentality of our youth, killing each other for nonsense, disregard for their families, and an over-sexualiztion amongst them like we've never seen before. You cannot tell me that the culture that mr Savage promotes is not aiding in some part in it. It might not be the only contributor for our dire situation, but it plays a role, and we just don't need that kind of stuff added to our plate or we will cease to exist as a community.
28
That's not an argument against gay marriage, it's an argument for gay sperm donors.
(Wait a sec... Reverend underhandedly hinting about sperm donation to sexy reporter man? Hmmmm.... he's not Catholic is he?)
(Wait a sec... Reverend underhandedly hinting about sperm donation to sexy reporter man? Hmmmm.... he's not Catholic is he?)
29
as for loveschild..tell her to fuck off and go away.. and then ignore her.. she won't go away, but you'll feel better.
31
@30
Yup, so that's where you win. Exactly. Everyone should be miserable and lying to one another just so that we can pass on some genes??? I don't think so. That's where this guy's argument falls flat.
Yup, so that's where you win. Exactly. Everyone should be miserable and lying to one another just so that we can pass on some genes??? I don't think so. That's where this guy's argument falls flat.
32
Aren't you all tired of all these proverbial "gay friends" that every right-winger claims to have? There aren't enough gay people in the world, seriously.
33
Children (especially those in our community) need stable homes, a Mom and a Dad so that not only they're able to pass on their genes but also their culture, sense of worth, their rich and proud history and institute on them strong moral values that can only be provided withing the nuclear family.
Loveschild, if I remember correctly, you're a single mother. In other words you're not practicing what you preach. But as for this "nuclear family" argument, why can't a nuclear family consist of two fathers, or two mothers? Mr. Savage seems to be doing all right as far as creating a stable family and a good environment for his son. Does the fact that such families can and do exist frighten you too much to even acknowledge it?
34
LovesChildPorn - All the acceptance of gay marriage in the world isn't going to convince one straight person to marry someone of the same sex.
35
@ 25
We have a population problem? There isn't enough people around ? Sure, the earth is turning into a barely populated desert land, unless all the gays urgently start procreating.
So Dan Savage should urgently divorce his partner, find a womanoid to marry and pass his writing genes to as many as possible?
LC,girl, you aren't hot for Dan, I hope? That isnt some kind of evil plot on your part, is it?
We have a population problem? There isn't enough people around ? Sure, the earth is turning into a barely populated desert land, unless all the gays urgently start procreating.
So Dan Savage should urgently divorce his partner, find a womanoid to marry and pass his writing genes to as many as possible?
LC,girl, you aren't hot for Dan, I hope? That isnt some kind of evil plot on your part, is it?
36
It's another argument from the closet. If I gave into my desires then I wouldn't pass on my brilliant genes, I'd rape POWs, and be unable to resist pretty young men. Virtually every republican senator seems to be struggling with this.
37
Loveschild, your argument that allowing gay marriage will harm straight marriage is absolutely silly. Massachusetts has legalized gay marriage, and the lowest divorce rate in the country. That your marriage is hanging by a thread, and is somehow dependent on preventing gay people from getting married doesn't mean that others are.
38
I guess I shouldn't be surprised some people place so much emphasis on genes .. since these people are often the ones who seem to give up parenting at all after the kids are born. Hey, they're *born* smart, right?
39
Well, now, this is just fucking weird.
Maybe it's not particular ideas that appeal to bigots and fundies, but rather the very obsolescence of those ideas. Now that we in the scientific community are finally beginning to overcome the simplistic paradigm of genetic determinism that so many of us were taught, suddenly the anti-gay religious are taking it up?
Have the smugly ignorant suddenly decided that they like the idea of people built on genes, now that the idea is beginning to penetrate society that we're more than just genes? How fucking strange is that? I mean, it makes me wonder if someday soon I'm going to hear Pat Robertson declaiming on the luminiferous aether or perhaps Loveschild advancing the aquatic ape hypothesis.
Indeed, I'm really starting to see something wonderful and horrible coming together here: if evangelical bigots and steampunks both romanticize silly, obsolete pseudoscience, perhaps we'll soon see a megachurch all dressed up in lacy girdles, brass gears, and quartz aviator goggles? WHERE WILL IT END?
Maybe it's not particular ideas that appeal to bigots and fundies, but rather the very obsolescence of those ideas. Now that we in the scientific community are finally beginning to overcome the simplistic paradigm of genetic determinism that so many of us were taught, suddenly the anti-gay religious are taking it up?
Have the smugly ignorant suddenly decided that they like the idea of people built on genes, now that the idea is beginning to penetrate society that we're more than just genes? How fucking strange is that? I mean, it makes me wonder if someday soon I'm going to hear Pat Robertson declaiming on the luminiferous aether or perhaps Loveschild advancing the aquatic ape hypothesis.
Indeed, I'm really starting to see something wonderful and horrible coming together here: if evangelical bigots and steampunks both romanticize silly, obsolete pseudoscience, perhaps we'll soon see a megachurch all dressed up in lacy girdles, brass gears, and quartz aviator goggles? WHERE WILL IT END?
40
@35 Dear Alinka, mr Savage can do as he wishes. As far as I'm concerned, he has made his feelings of contempt for the African American community very clear. What i do care about however is what he is promoting publicly and what will happen to communities like mine if he succeeds in making this the law of the land.
42
@40: Questions: 1. Do you have children? 2. Are you married? 3. Do all of your children have the same father? Once you've answered these questions we will all know whether or not you're a hippocrate. Failure to answer these questions will be viewed as an admission that your ARE a hippocrate.
I dislike personalizing this but your repeated comments compell me to do so.
I dislike personalizing this but your repeated comments compell me to do so.
44
Loveschild, you have a truly remarkable ability to perceive racism that no one else in the entire world seems to be able to see.
Honestly, it's pathetic. Your thoughtless dismissal of everything Dan ever has to say as being due to his supposed prejudice dishonors what previous generations of African-Americans went through when there was, in fact, widespread discrimination against them. Your incomprehension of real bigotry, especially your own, is palpable. Grow up.
Honestly, it's pathetic. Your thoughtless dismissal of everything Dan ever has to say as being due to his supposed prejudice dishonors what previous generations of African-Americans went through when there was, in fact, widespread discrimination against them. Your incomprehension of real bigotry, especially your own, is palpable. Grow up.
45
The underlying belief of all the phobes is that homosexuality is the ultimate temptation. It is so delicious that if you remove society's disapproval of it, people will flock to gayness. I really think the phobes believe homosexuality is the default and we must continuously resist the temptation to give in. This is the only way to make sense of their arguments. If gays can get married, they'll abandon life as heterosexuals. If gays are "tolerated" by society, young people will decide to go gay en masse.
46
@44 -- "you have a truly remarkable ability to perceive racism that no one else in the entire world seems to be able to see."
Go read some posts by Mudede...
Go read some posts by Mudede...
47
*Gag*
I've no intention to procreate in a world where there are so many kids without good homes. I'd rather adopt or become a stepfather. Families are so much more complicated than this.
I've no intention to procreate in a world where there are so many kids without good homes. I'd rather adopt or become a stepfather. Families are so much more complicated than this.
48
I've got some entirely less-than-brilliant married friends, and it's a shame they are going to pass their genes on.
49
@46
Point taken, but I believe that Charles' particular flavor of inanity is substantively distinct, if only in that he doesn't use his peculiar perceptions to justify keeping any particular segment of the population relegated to the second-class.
Point taken, but I believe that Charles' particular flavor of inanity is substantively distinct, if only in that he doesn't use his peculiar perceptions to justify keeping any particular segment of the population relegated to the second-class.
50
LoveChild is supporting a eugenic statement ("brilliant people should be procreating!")?
So not surprised.
So not surprised.
51
@24: "It might not be the only contributor for our dire situation, but it plays a role, and we just don't need that kind of stuff added to our plate or we will cease to exist as a community."
So, basically, Loveschild believes in David Lane's Fourteen Words, just with "black" susbstituted for "white." Got it.
So, basically, Loveschild believes in David Lane's Fourteen Words, just with "black" susbstituted for "white." Got it.
52
@47: Word. It seems to me that the African-American population has a much bigger problem with having children without homes than homes without children, judging by the number of black children in foster care.
53
@18- "Fortunately, gay people can pass on their genes if they choose..."
You forget, in these people's world, reproduction and choice don't belong together. God commanded humans to multiply, and that means YOU.
Of course, he also commanded humans not to where mixed fibers.
You forget, in these people's world, reproduction and choice don't belong together. God commanded humans to multiply, and that means YOU.
Of course, he also commanded humans not to where mixed fibers.
54
@42
Questions: 1.
Yes.
Questions: 2.
Happily with the same great man who was my boyfriend in my teens, I've known no other man.
Questions: 3.
I believe # 2 answers # 3.
Questions: 1.
Yes.
Questions: 2.
Happily with the same great man who was my boyfriend in my teens, I've known no other man.
Questions: 3.
I believe # 2 answers # 3.
55
It's actually rather amazing that people get so caught up in all these arguments. So let's make it simple shall we? If you don't want gay marriage then don't get one! I mean, it's not like it's compulsory for you. Btw, if you're not getting one and it dosen't affect you, then butt out- it's really none of your business.
Loveschild, the idea that the earth actually needs more people is simple disasterous. And if you're going to argue eugenics, then you've been born in the wrong time (try 1900s-1930s?). Sorry to inform you but we've kind of moved on from that. By the same virtue, this whole simplistic genetics argument of "passing good genes on" is pathetic. Go read up on your genetics and move away from your simple Mendelian model. "Good genes" and "Bad genes" indeed, what are we in kindergarten?? And I suppose that you've done your duty by passing on all the "good genes" to your kids and not the "bad ones"??? It is obvious that your arguments have been devoid of a systematic application of logic and bereft of the human element of love. Fancy how the bigots always try to reconcile the two...
Loveschild, the idea that the earth actually needs more people is simple disasterous. And if you're going to argue eugenics, then you've been born in the wrong time (try 1900s-1930s?). Sorry to inform you but we've kind of moved on from that. By the same virtue, this whole simplistic genetics argument of "passing good genes on" is pathetic. Go read up on your genetics and move away from your simple Mendelian model. "Good genes" and "Bad genes" indeed, what are we in kindergarten?? And I suppose that you've done your duty by passing on all the "good genes" to your kids and not the "bad ones"??? It is obvious that your arguments have been devoid of a systematic application of logic and bereft of the human element of love. Fancy how the bigots always try to reconcile the two...
56
@55: The organized eugenics movement was a bad idea, but the basic concept that genes, while not "good" or "bad" in some abstract sense, can lead to a better or worse chance at leading a productive, happy life, and that it's a good idea to promote an increased prevalence for those whose effects are desirable, for their bearers and for society as a whole, and to promote a decreased prevalence for those whose effects are undesirable, is a fundamentally sound one. Genetic counseling is eugenic in nature, although few people dare to call it that. Do you think that having fewer children born with Tay-Sachs disease, sickle cell anemia, Down's Syndrome (chromosomal rather than allelic, but with clear risk factors such as age of the mother), etc. is not a worthwhile goal?
57
@56:
Firstly, single point mutation diseases such as Tay-Sachs or Sickle-cell anemia (which btw confers protection from malaria so is it truly bad?) are easier to pin down than say multi-factorial genetically linked disorders such as DM II or Schizophrenia.
Secondly, the fundamental difference between genetic counselling and eugenics is that one makes you aware of the risks that you are taking when you reproduce that particular gene (whether it is a desirable or undesirable gene is subject to debate). Labeling genes "good" or "bad" is simply childish. Doubtless, diseases are usually undesirable. However, it is a minor hop from there to "the genetics of autism is undesirable". Then what do we do to eliminate undesirable genetics? Stop them from reproducing by castration (whether chemical or physical)? Bring on the good ol' days of Nazi Germany!
To be fair though, the idea of a "desirable effects" would vary from one person to another and from one society to another. Hence, this rather original albeit poorly constructed idea that we would want certain traits passed on and not others (especially in terms of gay men and women) would, while precluding the obvious, is impractical at best and dangerous at worst.
Firstly, single point mutation diseases such as Tay-Sachs or Sickle-cell anemia (which btw confers protection from malaria so is it truly bad?) are easier to pin down than say multi-factorial genetically linked disorders such as DM II or Schizophrenia.
Secondly, the fundamental difference between genetic counselling and eugenics is that one makes you aware of the risks that you are taking when you reproduce that particular gene (whether it is a desirable or undesirable gene is subject to debate). Labeling genes "good" or "bad" is simply childish. Doubtless, diseases are usually undesirable. However, it is a minor hop from there to "the genetics of autism is undesirable". Then what do we do to eliminate undesirable genetics? Stop them from reproducing by castration (whether chemical or physical)? Bring on the good ol' days of Nazi Germany!
To be fair though, the idea of a "desirable effects" would vary from one person to another and from one society to another. Hence, this rather original albeit poorly constructed idea that we would want certain traits passed on and not others (especially in terms of gay men and women) would, while precluding the obvious, is impractical at best and dangerous at worst.
59
Yeah, What with there only being six billion of us on the planet, what we really need to be doing is reproducing more... Brilliant god this guy has, fruitful and multiply, innit.
60
Interesting thought---societies that oppress gays actually end up breeding more of them, since closeted gays go on and marry, procreate and pass their gay genes ( cause it is something you're born with, so that would follow its genetic) to the next generation...
so, maybe this senator's REAL agenda is to breed a uber-race of super intellegent, genetically superior gays. just a thought.
so, maybe this senator's REAL agenda is to breed a uber-race of super intellegent, genetically superior gays. just a thought.
61
A man who takes away another man's freedom is a prisoner of hatred, he is locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness. I am not truly free if I am taking away someone else's freedom, just as surely as I am not free when my freedom is taken from me. The oppressed and the oppressor alike are robbed of their humanity.-Nelson Mandela
Loveschild, why is it that those who fought for civil rights, and happen to be gay, in South Africa were rewarded with constitutional protections for gays and gay marriage? Why is it that those who fought for civil rights, and happen to be gay, in the United States were rewarded with prejudice and narrow-mindedness?
Loveschild, why is it that those who fought for civil rights, and happen to be gay, in South Africa were rewarded with constitutional protections for gays and gay marriage? Why is it that those who fought for civil rights, and happen to be gay, in the United States were rewarded with prejudice and narrow-mindedness?
62
I'm reminded of a snippet of a TV show (can't remember which one, however) - the people in this scene were black and one said "You know what the most racist comment is?" "I have black friends." They all seemed to be upset by that comment. Admittedly, I don't get it. But it seems like the same thing.
64
You have to understand that Loveschild's one and only beloved, the guy she's been with since her teens, is "ex-Gay" and praying to stay that way. If gay marriage were legal, he might get rid of his self-loathing and be able to live a more open, honest life. Which leaves poor Loveschild where?
65
I am interested in all the married people with "no interest" in having children. There's a certain amount of theory out there that this behavior - the extension of adolescence long into adulthood, with no desire to ever raise a family because it would impinge on the freewheeling urban adult lifestyle, is the mark of a severely decadent culture.
A hundred or two hundred years from now, the only people who will have made an ongoing biological (and to a nearly equal extent, cultural - passing on stories, opinions, ethics, and personality tics to their children) contribution to society will be the ones who grew up and got about the business of life, whether by surrogacy, adoption, or more run-of-the-mill breeding.
The rest, the perpetual chilrden who couldn't be bothered, are essentially biological and cultural dead ends. Which is fine, I'm not saying they should choose differently. Just pointing out that that's the choice being made.
A hundred or two hundred years from now, the only people who will have made an ongoing biological (and to a nearly equal extent, cultural - passing on stories, opinions, ethics, and personality tics to their children) contribution to society will be the ones who grew up and got about the business of life, whether by surrogacy, adoption, or more run-of-the-mill breeding.
The rest, the perpetual chilrden who couldn't be bothered, are essentially biological and cultural dead ends. Which is fine, I'm not saying they should choose differently. Just pointing out that that's the choice being made.
66
Loveschild is a married mother of three? How does she make the time to sign on and bitch about us fags so constantly?
67
I've known of Rev. Fauntleroy of DC for years now. I've been to his church (when I was younger) and have family that attend there regularly. I'm disgusted and awe-struck by his ignorance but instantly recognized it as classic, black, old-school, religious homophobia and selective ignorance.
His former church- New Bethel Baptist Church (he's now retired), is a Baptist church and most black-southern baptist churches have a distinct "selective" ignorance when it comes to any subject of GAY, period. It's sad to see that he has insulated himself on the realities of social life and human sexuality after marching with Dr. King and being on this planet for as long as he has.
He is painfully incorrect and I look forward to the day when people like this can no longer speak on these issues...or at all.
His former church- New Bethel Baptist Church (he's now retired), is a Baptist church and most black-southern baptist churches have a distinct "selective" ignorance when it comes to any subject of GAY, period. It's sad to see that he has insulated himself on the realities of social life and human sexuality after marching with Dr. King and being on this planet for as long as he has.
He is painfully incorrect and I look forward to the day when people like this can no longer speak on these issues...or at all.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Whitney Is Dead, And So Is Hollywood by Kelly O
-
Planned Parenthood Exposed! by David Schmader
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (67) RSS