Milovana.com

Just curious...how would you feel about a gay couple having natural children?

I kind of don't understand how to males (or 2 females) can have a natural children?

Nezhul wrote:

Just curious...how would you feel about a gay couple having natural children?

I kind of don't understand how to males (or 2 females) can have a natural children?

With gay females it would need unprotected sex with any willing male.
If we add wishes into the equation then the girls make it a threesome which few males would reject I expect.

In vitro fertilisation,
Would work for both couples, as part donors.

I would hope my children are able to go through life with having to endure as few hardships as possible. One might argue that this is not necessarily a good thing, as hardships build character and help a person grow and mature, but I think that is untrue. The hardships I am talking about are ones that a child shouldn't have to go through. They are hardships that we should, as a society, fight to eliminate, because people shouldn't have to go through them if they are so unfortunate to be forced to.

I don't think a child should be made fun of because they talk funny. I don't think a child should be made fun of their weight. I don't think a child should be made fun of because they have a mental disability. I don't think a child should have to endure life with a cleft palate, endure life as a dwarf, or any other immediate or long-term birth defect. So, I would hope my child doesn't talk funny, doesn't have a weight issue, doesn't develop Turret's Syndrome, Autism, ADD, or mental retardation. I hope he doesn't have a huge height problem, or any other thing that will make people make fun of his physical appearance for the rest of his life.

I also hope, for his own sake, he won't be homosexual, for these same reasons as above. I don't want anything for my child that will make his life considerably more difficult for him or her. It does not mean I'll be at all disappointed if he or she happens to be gay or have any of the above conditions. We can work through anything.

Nezhul wrote:

Just curious...how would you feel about a gay couple having natural children?

I kind of don't understand how to males (or 2 females) can have a natural children?

This doesn't answer the question, but like I said before, scientists are working on it.

Evals wrote:I also hope, for his own sake, he won't be homosexual, for these same reasons as above. I don't want anything for my child that will make his life considerably more difficult for him or her. It does not mean I'll be at all disappointed if he or she happens to be gay or have any of the above conditions. We can work through anything.

This is understandable, but like I said before, it depends on where you live. As it seems you wouldn't mind if the child was homosexual in an environment that was fully accepting, perhaps you mean that you hope that the child won't be bullied for being homosexual.

Alliteration wrote:This is understandable, but like I said before, it depends on where you live. As it seems you wouldn't mind if the child was homosexual in an environment that was fully accepting, perhaps you mean that you hope that the child won't be bullied for being homosexual.

Correct. I feel most societies discriminate based on sexual orientation. It is something that really cannot be avoided, especially during one's youth when children are most vulnerable.

Evals wrote: Correct. I feel most societies discriminate based on sexual orientation. It is something that really cannot be avoided, especially during one's youth when children are most vulnerable.

+1 Look at the site itgetsbetter.org
To give another analogy, lets say a parent has a boy, and somehow magically the parent has a choice in whether the boy is bald by age 20, or has a full head of hair. There is nothing wrong with being bald; but which parent would not pick the full head of hair option?

Indigo™ wrote:The person that takes pride in themselves. Perhaps the proud family line has been bald for generations, it's a venerated tradition that members of the family have bald heads.

Same goes for anything. Since it's going to get brought up - this applies to homosexuality as well. Most of the arguments I've heard are from the perspective that being homosexual should somehow be frowned upon. Perhaps some folks are right, and it shouldn't be thrust in others' faces, but neither is it something to be frowned upon and shunned. Whether you're man, or wo-man, we're all hu-man.

Are you spying on me?

I'm actually in this EXACT situation - I am 25, and have a receding hairline. Every man on my mothers' side of the family had the same thing happen, around the same age. It goes back at least five generations. It's kind of a "mark" showing that I'm part of the family - "Look, he's a ____!" (last name removed :P)

In fact, if my mother had had the opportunity to choose whether I would receive the baldness genes, she probably would have left them there, and looking back, I wouldn't want her to remove them. There's sort of a family solidarity going on with our shiny heads.

Code: Select all

[quote]Just curious...how would you feel about a gay couple having natural children? [/quote]I kind of don't understand how to males (or 2 females) can have a natural children?

This doesn't answer the question, but like I said before, scientists are working on it.

You are talking about some time when scientists can take the genes of both partners, mix them, and make it a baby? Well genetically it would be theirs, of course, but actually that's a bit less of a relationship that occurs while the baby is born from your wife (or for girls - from you). Science will do a lot of things eventually.

But let's keep it up to date. Or else if we start thinking about what would science make possible... What if they'll learn to "cure" homosexuality in the childhood while the child didn't make any sexual associations thus won't suffer of a change of viewpoint? I'd rather vote for that than tolerance for homosexuals.
Or what if they will allow a guy attracted to another males to actually switch a body with a lesbian? Or make their own completely female (by all functions and genes) body so they can live on as a female? I'd actually stand first in the line, as no matter how I love girls and how I hate the thought of gay sex, it always was a fantasy of mine - to become a female, not a trans, but real one. (On the side note here - strange. Being a man it disgusts me to imagine myself having sex, kissing or sucking cock of another male, HOWEVER if I'd be a girl, I'd have no problem with it, and rather had problems with having lesbian sex. So my mind strangely can think two ways on that matter).

Bottomline is, that it's all cool to fantasize about what scientists do, but it's somwhere far away. Even if tomorrow they claim they invented a way for two men to have their genetical child, it would be DECADES before our society will accept even a proposition of making it real, and yet another decades before it would get cheap enough for an ordinary gay pair to acess this possibility.

With gay females it would need unprotected sex with any willing male.
If we add wishes into the equation then the girls make it a threesome which few males would reject I expect.

Well I already said that either way it would be a child to only one of them and there's a problem of another parent, so I actually don't think it's remotely the same as having your wife give birth to your child.

To give another analogy, lets say a parent has a boy, and somehow magically the parent has a choice in whether the boy is bald by age 20, or has a full head of hair. There is nothing wrong with being bald; but which parent would not pick the full head of hair option?

That's exactly what I was talking about earlier. Given a choice wouldn't most parents pick their child to be straight? I don't think so.

Alliteration wrote: Are you spying on me?

I'm actually in this EXACT situation - I am 25, and have a receding hairline. Every man on my mothers' side of the family had the same thing happen, around the same age. It goes back at least five generations. It's kind of a "mark" showing that I'm part of the family - "Look, he's a ____!" (last name removed :P)

In fact, if my mother had had the opportunity to choose whether I would receive the baldness genes, she probably would have left them there, and looking back, I wouldn't want her to remove them. There's sort of a family solidarity going on with our shiny heads.

Shiny heads.....can be very sexy on the right person! *grin*
Both of these men......get me all hornified! *giggling*

Indigo™ wrote:

Spoiler: show

Alliteration wrote:
Are you spying on me?
I'm actually in this EXACT situation - I am 25, and have a receding hairline. Every man on my mothers' side of the family had the same thing happen, around the same age. It goes back at least five generations. It's kind of a "mark" showing that I'm part of the family - "Look, he's a ____!" (last name removed :P)

In fact, if my mother had had the opportunity to choose whether I would receive the baldness genes, she probably would have left them there, and looking back, I wouldn't want her to remove them. There's sort of a family solidarity going on with our shiny heads.

Careful, Allit - don't want to be accused of intentionally flaming another thread. Let's keep it on topic.

Uh oh....I went off topic...my bad. *giggling*

Nezhul wrote:You are talking about some time when scientists can take the genes of both partners, mix them, and make it a baby? Well genetically it would be theirs, of course, but actually that's a bit less of a relationship that occurs while the baby is born from your wife (or for girls - from you). Science will do a lot of things eventually.

But let's keep it up to date. Or else if we start thinking about what would science make possible... What if they'll learn to "cure" homosexuality in the childhood while the child didn't make any sexual associations thus won't suffer of a change of viewpoint?

This isn't some far-off, "one day we can" thing. It's current research. http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=3904

I give it 20 years tops. But, why would this baby be "less of a relationship"?

Nezhul wrote:Bottomline is, that it's all cool to fantasize about what scientists do, but it's somwhere far away. Even if tomorrow they claim they invented a way for two men to have their genetical child, it would be DECADES before our society will accept even a proposition of making it real, and yet another decades before it would get cheap enough for an ordinary gay pair to acess this possibility.

Probably not. Look at human genome sequencing - the first human genome was sequenced in 2000; and since then, the price of getting it done has dropped from $50,000 in 2008, to $10,000, in 2011. It'll probably drop to $1,000 or less by 2015, and maybe even no more than the cost of a flu shot by 2020. As long as there's no market forces artificially inflating the price of things, costs usually drop within ONE decade.

Alliteration wrote: In fact, if my mother had had the opportunity to choose whether I would receive the baldness genes, she probably would have left them there, and looking back, I wouldn't want her to remove them. There's sort of a family solidarity going on with our shiny heads.

You wouldnt want to have a full head of hair?

Human wrote:

Alliteration wrote: In fact, if my mother had had the opportunity to choose whether I would receive the baldness genes, she probably would have left them there, and looking back, I wouldn't want her to remove them. There's sort of a family solidarity going on with our shiny heads.

You wouldnt want to have a full head of hair?

Correct. As I said, the receding hairline marks me as part of the family; and family is far more important to me than having hair.

As long as there's no market forces artificially inflating the price of things, costs usually drop within ONE decade.

Well they did successfully ban cloning. Although by now we'd have the technology to grow up a full organs for transplantation in a glass cans, the research is banned, and noone does it. And it'll be banned for a long time still. I don't think if they managed to ban this, they'll actually allow the tech of creating children artificially to go live. Well that's my opinion.

As for why it'll be less of a child (I just don't know how to say that properly, I of course don't mean it'll be less human), it's just when a child is done through lovemaking, and then both parents experience the challenge of pregnacy (It affects a husbend too), and then the child is born while the husbend is smoking nervously in the hall of a clinic... and both parents hold it then and know it's their own flesh, that just hours ago was still growing inside of her virtue...
Anyway if you ask me that's just creates more of a link, than receiving a child from a fake mother by contract, or adopting it, or making it in a science lab (men can't be pregnant for a looong time still, they simply lack the needed organs).... All of it is just not the same. It's a WAY, of course. But it's not as good as having your own child from your own women.

Nezhul wrote:

As long as there's no market forces artificially inflating the price of things, costs usually drop within ONE decade.

Well they did successfully ban cloning. Although by now we'd have the technology to grow up a full organs for transplantation in a glass cans, the research is banned, and noone does it. And it'll be banned for a long time still. I don't think if they managed to ban this, they'll actually allow the tech of creating children artificially to go live. Well that's my opinion.

As for why it'll be less of a child (I just don't know how to say that properly, I of course don't mean it'll be less human), it's just when a child is done through lovemaking, and then both parents experience the challenge of pregnacy (It affects a husbend too), and then the child is born while the husbend is smoking nervously in the hall of a clinic... and both parents hold it then and know it's their own flesh, that just hours ago was still growing inside of her virtue...
Anyway if you ask me that's just creates more of a link, than receiving a child from a fake mother by contract, or adopting it, or making it in a science lab (men can't be pregnant for a looong time still, they simply lack the needed organs).... All of it is just not the same. It's a WAY, of course. But it's not as good as having your own child from your own women.

Perhaps I should have mentioned then, that this research (at least for female couples) only involves technology up to the point where an embryo is implanted in a womb. All that's happening is they're making sperm from female cells, and using IVF techniques, which we already have.

As for male couples, well, we already have artificial hearts; I suspect the reason we don't yet have an artificial uterus is that the demand for it is low.