- Joined
- Oct 18, 2011
- Messages
- 6,769
- Reaction score
- 1,936
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Though it is crystal clear that homosexuality is a birth defect, an epigentic manifestation, not a genetic dominant or recessive manifestation ..So what does it matter if it's a birth defect?
We let people who have down syndrome get married.
We consider Polydactyly (6 fingers) to be a birth defect, but it's actually a dominant gene.
Aren't dimples a birth defect where the skin attaches to the muscle incorrectly?
Even if we accept homosexuality to be a birth defect, it changes exactly nothing.
.. What it matters that the etiology of homosexulity has finally been discovered, and, that it has been discovered to be an epigenetic birth defect, means that homosexulity likely has a prevention, like the birth defect of spina bifida was discovered to have an epigenetic modification prevention via giving the pregnant woman high does of B vitamins and folate.
That's huge, as that means the suffering intrinsic to the birth defect of homosexuality can one day be prevented.
Because the birth defect of homosexuality is epigenetically oriented, modifying the epi-markers of postnatals may hold promise in actually curing the defect in those who already have it.
The mattering of the reality of the birth defect nature of homosexuality is medical with regard to improving human health.
However, a number of ideologues are whining in a manner that suggests they think there will be an adverses political repercussion to the reality knowledge of the birth defect nature of homosexuality spreading to the general population.
Though I think the birth defect reality of homosexuality will increase compassion and reducing bullying of homosexuals ..
.. Those of you who think there will be negative repercussions to the spreading of the birth defect reality of homosexuality please state specifically what adverse things you think are going to happen as a result.