It's now possible to know the sexual orientation of an unborn child, and to change it in the womb. Would you want to?

[Anonymous]

Over the past 2 decades, researchers have turned up considerable evidence that homosexuality isn't a lifestyle choice, but is rooted in a person's biology and at least in part determined by genetics. Yet actual “gay genes” have been elusive. Now, though, we know that epigenetic effects may have a major influence on sexual orientation. There are specific gay gene sequences, but they can't be the full explanation- The identical twin of a gay man, despite having the same genome, only has a 20% to 50% chance of being gay himself. Which is where epigenetics comes in- during fetal development, chromosomes are subject to chemical changes that don't affect the DNA nucleotide sequence, but can turn genes on or off.

Such “epi-marks” can remain in place for a lifetime, and most are erased when eggs and sperm are produced, but some marks are passed on to the next generation. And those inherited marks that influence a fetus's sensitivity to testosterone in the womb appear to “masculinize” the brains of girls and “feminize” those of boys, leading to same-sex attraction. Recent preliminary studies identified five regions in the genome where specific epi-marks are very closely linked to sexual orientation, and were able to predict sexual orientation with almost 70% accuracy. And further studies should soon be able to predict sexual orientation with over 90% accuracy.

These epi-marks can now be identified, and either introduced or erased artificially, in vitro. Meaning that we can now identify the sexual orientations of unborn fetuses, and alter them in the womb. A homosexual lesbian couple could introduce the desired epi-marks to make sure their daughter's born a lesbian, or a heterosexual couple could erase those epi-marks to ensure their child's born a heterosexual. If you could know what your unborn child's sexual orientation was, at the same stage when you could know its gender, would you want to know? And would you want to change its sexual orientation if it wasn't ideal?

[BurCelf]

I wouldn't want to know for 2 reasons.
1) I am bisexual. It will make no difference to me if my children are bi, lesbian, or gay.

2) When my body is creating something so wonderful, why would I want to change it? Why wouldn't I be proud of my baby for being themselves?

3) That is something that would affect my baby their whole lives. I don't want to make a drastic decision like that for them.

[Asker]

All fair points, and I take my hat off to you. But still, even if it wouldn't change anything for you, wouldn't you want to know about something that'll affect your baby their whole lives, so that you can cater to them and be as supportive as possible once they're old enough to start exploring it themselves?

[BurCelf]

That's a fair point too. Yes and no. Yes, but also no because I'd like my child to be comfortable enough to tell me him/herself and then me be able to cater to their needs. I wouldn't like to tell my child "I know you're gay because I made you that way" or "I know you're straight because I made you that way". I wouldn't like it because I would have changed them without their say. What if they hate that they're straight and it's my fault they are? What if I were to make my daughter lesbian and she hates that she is? I wouldn't want to be the reason for it 🙁

[Asker]

You wouldn't have to change it though- it'd be far easier not to change it, and leave it as it is. But you could now verify whether they're heterosexual, bi or homosexual, at the same stage of development when you'd be able to verify whether they're male or female. You'd be able to tell your child with near certainty "I know you're gay/bi/straight because you were born that way, and God made you that way". And it wouldn't be your fault, any more than it'd be if your daughter were born as a daughter instead of a son.

[BurCelf]

Oh okay, I misunderstood! I'm sorry. Then I see the point you're making. I don't know, it wouldn't make any difference to me. I guess I might want to know because it'd be exciting! Lol

[musicbrain5]

It's not something I would care to know. All I want to know is if my child is going to be physically and mentally healthy, and if there are defects I would want to be able to prepare myself for that and educate myself on how to care for them.

I don't give a shit about their sexual orientation. It doesn't affect their overall health and I'm not against my child being gay.

[Asker]

So if you'd want to be able to prepare yourself and educate yourself on how to care for them, why wouldn't you go with option C)? It certainly does affect the overall health and well being of homosexuals to be treated like heterosexuals. Wouldn't you want to know, and be able to accommodate your child's homosexuality before he/she goes through the stage where he/she's more than four times as likely than the average kid to fall into depression, start self-harming and attempt suicide trying to figure it out?

[musicbrain5]

I wouldn't want to know, because there's nothing to accommodate. In this context, mentally healthy to me means that there are no developmental delays. If there are, I would like to know as soon as possible. As far as I know, being gay isn't a developmental delay or a learning disability, nor is it a physical disability. It's not something that I need to know before they figure it out themselves when they get older. I just want to create an environment where we all communicate with each other and where my child can feel comfortable enough to A) express their thoughts and feelings to me or my husband, or B) state that they would like to see a therapist about this, or both. Why would I treat a gay child different than a straight one?

[openthedoors]

I wouldn't do anything to my child because I don't know the long lasting affects of gene therapy and I wouldn't abort just because of sexuality but it would kill me if my child was gay and wouldn't make me grand kids.

[Asker]

Thing is, this isn't the type of gene therapy that adds or takes away genes. Epigenetics is the type of gene therapy which simply induces the activation or deactivation of gene sequences which you already have- your genetics stay the same. But by inducing the activation and deactivation of these 'epi-marks'- not necessarily just in the womb, as happens naturally to everyone, but potentially at any stage in a person's life through a formulated injection- one could alter anyone's sexual orientation from one to another with relative ease, and make anyone heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual or asexual, with the option of reversing the sexual orientation change just as easily. So if you wanted grandkids, you could try and persuade your child to give being heterosexual a go just for a little while before going back to being homosexual again. if he/she didn't like it.

[openthedoors]

Still I wouldn't mess with gene editing we don't know exactly how epigenetics works and how the markers are changed. I don't want to experiment on my kids unless the procedure is very refined.

[somebodysaycheese]

Well, gay men have more testosterone than straight men. So this sh*t is bs.
And where is the science behind this?

[Asker]

It's the testosterone (androgen) levels they're exposed to in their mother's womb during fetal development, not the testosterone levels that they themselves have in later life. www.sciencemag.org/.../homosexuality-may-be-caused-chemical-modifications-dna

[somebodysaycheese]

So , yes. We know that gay men when they transition sometimes their sexuality can change and they go from liking boys and girls and we also known trauma to the head can change ones sexuality. So , how is this a good indicator? It isn't. There is more science that says its from ones enviroment. I can't from a scientific stand point agree with this. I think its psuedoscience based on bs.

[Asker]

How solid are the scientific definitions of homosexuality and heterosexuality anyway though? When it's all self-reported, who's to say whether anyone's straight or homosexual, or whether anyone's male or female now that transgender people have to be acknowledged as equally valid? Everything can be argued to be pseudoscience based on bs- gender dismorphia, racial dismorphia, homosexuality, ALL can be argued to be pseudoscience based on the bs notion that 'I'm _________ because I say I am, and because I say that there's nothing wrong with me, and because I say I was born this way, so it's valid and it's good to be the way I am." If you believe it's from one's environment, then wouldn't that mean that gay conversion camps and conversion therapies would be perfectly legit, and that people COULD be converted to or away from being LGBTQ through forced trauma to the head or through conversion techniques? You DON'T believe that people are born that way?

[somebodysaycheese]

transgender people are people who suffer from categorical mental illness. Transgender people didn't just come about. For about 100 years govts of the world where forcing gays to transition. What is homosexuality obviously the attraction to the same sex ( someone with the same chromosomes) That isn't very difficult No , i dont beleive gay people are born gay. Why? More unbiased science says its nature. Gay conversion isn't seeking the psychy of homosexuals. the LGBTQA has the highest concentration of mental illness. If they all had thorough mental health or if people came from better homes i garauntee you LGBT wouldn't exist. And from a historical point. We only know homosexuality starting in Europe the Greeks and Romans are the only society that praticed homosexuality and cutting the balls of little boys and calling them " Half boys" we can now call them transgenders. This never existed before european conquest on lands. But im not the only one saying this. Human history doesn't support

[somebodysaycheese]

as being around outside of Europe.

[Asker]

So you think that all LGBTQ people could be effectively cured through mental health programs and psych ward treatment? Homosexuality can be seen historically across the globe- East Asia, Melanesia, the Americas, even Africa and the Middle East, all had homosexuals long before the Europeans arrived. Look it up- if it is social and cultural, then it's been common to many different societies and cultures over the course of history. But hey, if you think it can be cured through brainwashing, you're welcome to try.

[somebodysaycheese]

Actually i have. Had a long semester on this stuff. NO. nothing predates the Greek and Roman empire both prominent gay empires. I didn't know psychology is brain washing. I guess youd rather abort a ton of kids. SMH

[Soteris]

Complete waste of time. Being gay would not negatively or positively impact life where I am from. I might as well be deciding their favorite food.

[Asker]

Or you might as well be finding out and deciding what gender they were. After all, being male or female wouldn't negatively or positively impact life where you're from, so it'd be a complete waste of time to find out whether your child's a boy or a girl, right?

[Soteris]

Pretty much.

[Asker]

But everyone still wants to know that though, don't they?

[Soteris]

You mean since everyone want to know if they got a boy or a girl they also should want to know their sexual orientation?

[madhatters4]

if this was reliable i'd want to know only so i could prepare to be able to support them as best i could.

[lumos]

I wouldn't want to know, because I don't care. I just want my hypothetical kid to be healthy, happy and safe.

[BigCat90]

What's an awful question? Sure I'd love my baby regardless of sexual orientation!

[Asker]

All too easy to say- not so easy to do.

[LadyTerror]

I don't want to have kids so I wouldn't have to worry about that. But I also don't see a reason why I'd want to know

[jacquesvol]

Link to that study , please.

[objectivetruth]

Homosexuality has never been, nor will it ever be, genetic. It is purely a mental disorder than can be cured.

[John_Doesnt]

Only an uneducated moron would believe this is possible.

[madelacroix]

I'd probably be more accepting of a gay daughter than a gay son.

[chrisbigman]

Changing the natural order of existence is a VERY bad idea. Take inbreeding as a good example.

[anonman32]

Can you do this with natural conception as well?

[Asker]

Yes, you can. This isn't like designer babies- you're not altering any genes prior to conception. You're just using epi-marks, induced by chemical changes, to switch certain genes on or off during the process of embryonic development, and either activate or de-activate those which cause sexual attraction to males and/or females. Indeed, this could even be done in later life, not just in the womb- these epi-marks could theoretically be activated or deactivated at any stage in life, allowing gene therapists to alter anyone's sexual orientation from one to another with relative ease, and make anyone heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual or asexual.

[anonman32]

I would not do it because i respect the integrity of my childrens body. But i do not want gay kids so i will make more kids that are not gay.

[BigLabs56]

That's the most distorted conclusion you could possibly come to that its not even scientific. I'm calling you out.

[mrkdvsn]

The whole "sexual orientation" thing really angers me. A boy is a BOY, and a girl is a GIRL. Homosexuality is a MENTAL ILLNESS

[Hbbbbb]

Make the world gay

[scooogy]

I'd rather like them to invent a genetic test for latent homosexuality for grown up people.

[Anonymous]

What should it matter? I wouldn't be terribly abject to knowing but I wouldn't try to find out.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't want to know... I don't find out genders either...

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't care at all that doesn't affect anything