It won't work that way, though. I have personally witnessed a holier-than-thou "Christian" send his daughter off for a hush-hush abortion because he couldn't stand the social embarassment. Think of all the people who spend thousands on cosmetic dental work and plastic surgery for their little princes and princesses.

If they were able to tell if Buffy or Troy was gonna be gay, they'd be the first to roll the dice and take another shot. God forbid the neighbors find out you carry a queer gene...

Fear of the herd is a powerful emotion. Genetic diversity cuts both ways. On the one hand you might be born with really nice feathers that gets you a super cool mate, or on the other you might be born with a characteristic that gets you drummed out of your social structure.

If homosexuality is truly pinned down as nature, and not choice, I think it could be much worse for homosexuals. There's a big difference between being seen as wrong-minded and "genetically flawed".

As I said before, this question poses an interesting problem for all sides of the abortion issue. In fact, the concept flies in the face of all but the extremes of "pro abortion" and "anti abortion (Bakerstreet's examples of hypocrissy not withstanding). Of course, the absolute pro abortion side (and let's not play the stupid game of saying, "no one is pro abortion") would say that a woman who doesn't want the fetus should abort it and no one should even venture to wonder why. On the other hand, the anti abortion side should stay in character and insist the gay baby be allowed the birthright of birth.

The problems lies in all the "in between" points of both the abortion and homosexuality issues. Already we have situations where women are seeking abortions for all sorts of genetic reasons. A great many "birth defects" are being identified before the birth of the apparently defective fetus. Sometimes it's not even an actual defect that motivates the mother to the local clinic. Just the fact that the fetus isn't the sex the mother wants seems to be all it takes.

So, Pro Chiocers and Feminists, is abortion just because the fetus is female a matter of "choice"? Is aborting a fetus for Down's Syndrome ok? If it's all about choice, would only homophobe's choose to abort a homosexual fetus? If so, how dare you judge a woman for choosing and abortion...

I know in Deaf Culture, couples often celebrate when their newborns are also deaf. Just think of the outcry from our society if we learned that a Deaf woman aborted a fetus because it was hearing.

I still say that we really need to quit turning to our politicians to define "life" and "species" and leave that to the biologists though. At this point we can't even seem to agree that an organism with its own metabolism and unique DNA consistent with that of Homo Sapiens is actually a human being or not.

A few more of my thoughts on the subject can be found here. Link

It still seems pretty clear to me. The people in the example Bakerstreet gave were clearly hypocritical, as are people who claim that nobody has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body concerning pregnancy, and then saying that she should be forced to beget a child that she does not want because her motive is controversial.

It still seems pretty clear to me. The people in the example Bakerstreet gave were clearly hypocritical, as are people who claim that nobody has a right to tell a woman what to do with her body concerning pregnancy, and then saying that she should be forced to beget a child that she does not want because her motive is controversial.

The begetting has already happened, if it hadn't there wouldn't be anything to abort. If what has been begat is a human being, then the question isn't a matter of an individual's right to her own body, since there are two individuals in the question.

Of course, if what has been begat isn't a human being, then of course, she would have every right to make the choice.

Of course, the biological evidence pretty much precludes the fetus from being anything but homo sapien. But as I said before, that part will be up for debate as long as we allow politicians to define "species" and "life" instead of biologists.

Ah, you beat me to it.  I was going to write this one, but instead I will comment on yours.

The issue is one that will surely make strange bedfellows among many groups.  Conservative Christians siding with Homosexuals and Liberal Activists being on the outside (except in the hypocrit area). 

But it will also cause a re-evaluation of many poeple's faith and beliefs.  Can Conservative Christians who condemn homosexuality now condemn a baby for the simple fact it was conceived and born out of love?  They do not do that to DS children, and I think while many will deny the evidence, many faiths will adapt or die out.

ON the other end of the spectrum, the common practice of gendercide in China, which is largely ignored by NARAL et. al., will come full force to smack them in the face as hetero parents opt to abort a homo fetus.  I know the thought of aborting a DS child is not much of a moral dilemna to NARAL et. al.  But Homosexuals (as both DS and Homosexuals are a gene isssues) are not a burden like a DS child (unless you are counting on grandchildren for your retirement).  Oh the tangled web we weave when we try to deny the self.

I hope they do prove it.  I want to see the twisting and turning of the NARAL thugs when parents start testing for and aborting homosexual fetuses.

The begetting has already happened, if it hadn't there wouldn't be anything to abort. If what has been begat is a human being, then the question isn't a matter of an individual's right to her own body, since there are two individuals in the question.

I used the wrong word. I just meant "give birth."

The issue is one that will surely make strange bedfellows among many groups.  Conservative Christians siding with Homosexuals and Liberal Activists being on the outside (except in the hypocrit area).

It'd really show who's serious about their beliefs. We'll see if the pro-life really care about life, even if it is the life of a homosexual, and if the pro-choice really support a woman's right to choose, even if they abort the "undesirables."