This is my question -
If a religious fundamentalist believes that homosexuality is a choice and also that it is unnatural, it may pose an ethics question for them later on...
If scientists are able to alter the hormonal chemistry or DNA of an unborn child to prevent the presence of "the gay gene" - would religious fundamentalists support this procedure?
Because anyone who supports this procedure would be then be admitting that
a) God makes mistakes
b) homosexuality is a natural occurance
c) doctors are authorized to "play God"
This question is not meant to offend anyone - no matter what their beliefs.... I really just want to know (if this became a reality) if fundamentalists would find it more pertinent to "tamper with nature to fit the book" or if they would "accept that God has his reasons and leave well enough alone"....
2006-10-24 13:36:35 · 9 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
No I would not "change" my gay child even if there WAS a way to "change" them. There's nothing wrong with homosexuality and if my child is going to be gay then my child is going to be gay. Why screw around with their fundamentals unecessarily?
2006-10-24 13:39:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I personally do not believe in the "gay gene" because the Bible describes homosexuality as a choice and specifically due to the hardness of peoples hearts they were given over to the lust of their own flesh. Homosexuality is a lust of the flesh which is given into by the person and a sin, but pre-marital sex is also a sin in the same regard. As well as looking at a woman with lust in your heart meaning pornography. what I'm saying is that homosexuality is a sin, just as many other things are. I'm not excusing it, I'm saying many more people are in the line of fire per say for their sins and the way other fundamentalists have isolated homosexuals is disgusting and a perversion of the scripture and the power of God.
a)I don't believe God makes mistakes, we can not understand the vastness of God's wisdom due to His eternal perspective, seeing literally the big picture.
b)homosexuality does occur naturally in the sense that we are human, inherit wicked, and able to be given over to all types of lusts and sinful desires.
c)I believe doctors are authorized to do much in the terms of "playing God", but my definition is different then probably some one Else's. But I wouldn't go as far as to genetic altering.
2006-10-24 21:52:37 · answer #2 · answered by joel_2_4runner 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why start with a 'later on' premise, the marriage of ethics and fundamentalism has never been consumated or celebrated with intelligence. Fundamentalist would only find excuses to play God themselves, thinking they know better than He. They always choose convenience or adherance to their mindlessness over logic as the solution to complicated issues. Abortion being a prime example of the onewaystreet. I'm sure they would never be satisfied to leave those that do not adhere to their decrees alone.
2006-10-24 23:30:21 · answer #3 · answered by razor 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is a TON of speculation in this question. I don't know. I wouldn't want to play God, and I don't think there is a "gay gene". It's something one would have to prayerfully consider. I wouldn't have the procedure done. I don't think it's right. I would pray God would change my child. I would hope there would be medicines or something. I don't know. Tough question, but it's not reality yet.
2006-10-24 20:41:21 · answer #4 · answered by teeney1116 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The one thing you forgot to bring up:
For a "homosexual gene" to exist, it should be present in ALL the homosexuals. All tests and theories were doctored, but even through that effect scientists could not prove totality in the homosexual gene, thus, homosexuals cannot change due to "birth defect."
Lastly, if scientists were able to "create" a homosexaul gene before birth, they would be altering the baby's choice to be heterosexual. This, in all morality, is wrong and unprecendented.
This is like the woman in Virginia who shot herself in her womb, killing th baby she was about to give birth to. What made it more ludicrous is the judge let her off, "no harm, no foul." This liberalist judge figured if the baby isn't out, then it is the mother's choice.
2006-10-24 20:54:01 · answer #5 · answered by n9wff 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
All sin and evil comes from the devil, and all good and perfect gift comes from God. If a person thinks he is born gay and wants to go to heaven, he must repent and that means turn away from the sin and accept Jesus. If it takes being celibate for a few years, compared to eternity, it Will be worth it.
2006-10-24 21:23:02 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Good question! Catch 22 in my book. I am going to say that they will be for the procedure, while admitting nothing. LOL
2006-10-24 20:39:57 · answer #7 · answered by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
im an atheist but i dont think there's a gay gene... it's more on nurture than nature.
i think it's equal to say.... "removing" the atheist or christian or wiccan gene...
2006-10-24 20:49:08 · answer #8 · answered by lnfrared Loaf 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you used way too many big words for the fundies
2006-10-24 20:40:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋