If they could know the sexual orientation of a fetus

[Dimmauk]

I think gays should be able to make more gay babies if they want.

[hey]

On subject, this is a horrible idea. Nobody should be able to choose who lives and who dies based on something as relatively meaningless as homosexuality. Would people even entertain this thought if parents had the right to have their kids executed at 18 because they were gay? I'm pro-choice, but I see a definite difference between not wanting a kid period and not wanting a kid because of X.

Where do you draw the line? You say homosexuality is meaningless, so great, that's not allowed. But what about something more meaningful? How about, say, a crippling disease, that's going to cause them nothing but misery for the few years they get to live before dying? Is it okay to abort then? Where do we draw the line?

Honestly, if the parents don't want a gay kid that bad that they would abort them for it, then they are better off not being born to such shit parents.

[BaneTheBrawler]

i think in that situation it is better to dispose of the post-fetal experimental tissue samples in question.

[Ksandra]

Since when does a fetus have a right to privacy from their parents? That doesn't kick in until they turn 18 afaik.

Food for thought that the convo on the other board has turned into. Is any kind of genome testing ethical to do? There is a scientist on the board that says while the knowledge may be sought out, there are many restrictions on what people can do with said knowledge (think stem cell research). The fetus will not always be a fetus, the child will not always be under 18, but once the parents know their genetic code, that means they know it their whole life.

So I guess it can be argued that this goes beyond just a fetus.

[Cantih]

There is a scientist on the board that says while the knowledge may be sought out, there are many restrictions on what people can do with said knowledge (think stem cell research). The fetus will not always be a fetus, the child will not always be under 18, but once the parents know their genetic code, that means they know it their whole life.

Tangent, but this is why there are people who are really opposed to using biometric and genetic information for identification and access purposes.
Someone figures out your password, you can change it. Someone copies your key, you can change the locks.
But you can't become someone else, so if your bio-data becomes compromised, anything that uses it for access will forever be insecure.

[BaneTheBrawler]

steal blood donation, crack accounts forever.

[kuronosan]

Tangent, but this is why there are people who are really opposed to using biometric and genetic information for identification and access purposes.
Someone figures out your password, you can change it. Someone copies your key, you can change the locks.
But you can't become someone else, so if your bio-data becomes compromised, anything that uses it for access will forever be insecure.

I totally can't wait to gain root access and unlock my baby's bootloader. If they still end up gay, I can always jailbreak them and install a custom ROM to my own specifications.

[Roranora]

Nice, we're going places now

[Waraji]

But will we still need Catastrophic Health Insurance Plans when we become Cybernetic Organisms?!

[Roranora]

It's not likely. Some poor cybernetic (?) organisms if so.

We'd more likely need to ask who is john galt

[Cantih]

But will we still need Catastrophic Health Insurance Plans when we become Cybernetic Organisms?!

Warranties

As I said tough, it's a tangent.
Back to the topic.

[hey]

Food for thought that the convo on the other board has turned into. Is any kind of genome testing ethical to do? There is a scientist on the board that says while the knowledge may be sought out, there are many restrictions on what people can do with said knowledge (think stem cell research). The fetus will not always be a fetus, the child will not always be under 18, but once the parents know their genetic code, that means they know it their whole life.

So I guess it can be argued that this goes beyond just a fetus.

So? Your dna isn't exactly private. You leave it behind everywhere you go, anyone can have it tested at any time.

[Restrat]

that's true, but there are already laws in place making it illegal to use that information. so in some sense there are legal protections from someone using your genetic information

[quannum]

privacy is an obsolete invention of the 20th century.

[Cantih]

privacy is an obsolete invention of the 20th century.

So you're perfectly fine with me attaching to you a small machine that reads your brainwaves and electrical impulses and transmits them, and using outputs from that to determine your thoughts, and from there make judgements on what to do with you?

Wonderful, report to room 101.

[quannum]

don't strawman me bro

[Quixon]

Would be thge ultimate catch 22 for the Christians lol, since they're all against abortion but also hate the gays which would they pick?

Christians would have a bigger issue with the simple presence of a "Gay Gene" so to speak. They believe being gay is a choice. The discovery of a "Gay Gene" would completely fuck their entire stance on the subject all together.

[Cantih]

don't strawman me bro

You said privacy is an obsolete idea. You attached no qualification to the statement limiting the degree, in fact by saying obsolete, you completely invalidate any degree of privacy.
(of the 20th century has no meaning to the validity, privacy remains privacy, regardless of the environment that surrounds it. The ability to maintain degrees of privacy can change with the environment, but that only matters to the difficulty, not the validity.)
Is this not the case? Would you like to clarify or modify your statement?

[Quixon]

How about, say, a crippling disease, that's going to cause them nothing but misery for the few years they get to live before dying? Is it okay to abort then? Where do we draw the line? Honestly, if the parents don't want a gay kid that bad that they would abort them for it, then they are better off not being born to such shit parents.

As a soon to be parent, I would be shitting you to say I never thought about this type of thing (crippling disease specifically). I know people who have kids with Downs, Cerebral Palsy, Autism, etc. They love their kids unconditionally, but at the same time these people have absolutely no life what so ever. Especially in the case with the kid that has C. Palsy, the kid is basically a vegetable.

I applaud them for their courage and will to give their kid a good life. I honestly would have no desire to deal with any of that shit for 12 months.... let alone 18+ years. I can't help but feel bad saying that, but it is what it is.

[quannum]

You said privacy is an obsolete idea. You attached no qualification to the statement limiting the degree, in fact by saying obsolete, you completely invalidate any degree of privacy.
(of the 20th century has no meaning to the validity, privacy remains privacy, regardless of the environment that surrounds it. The ability to maintain degrees of privacy can change with the environment, but that only matters to the difficulty, not the validity.)
Is this not the case? Would you like to clarify or modify your statement?

yea this is what i said, not your other post.