Robert Bradbury wrote:
>
>So, the real problem is not with the term "natural" or "atypical" but
>with the term "homosexual" -- it decribes a gross behavioral characteristic
>that might have multiple underlying, but distinctly different, physical
>(or environmental) causes.
Here's a random thought: when genetic engineering becomes relatively common and parents can select most of the genetic makeup of their soon-to-be progeny, how many parents --gay or straight-- would choose their offspring's sexual orientation as being homosexual? I can imagine that very few heterosexual parents would choose the opposite orientation for their children, but I also wonder how many homosexual parents would choose their children's sexual orientation to be the same. In the case of the latter, would homosexual parents choose heterosexuality for their children to prevent social nihilism and possible cultural unacceptance?
E. Shaun Russell Extropian, Musician, ExI Member e_shaun@uniserve.com <KINETICIZE *YOUR* POTENTIAL> ------------------------------------------------------- "The reason I'm involved with Extropy...is to end the carnage." -Robert Bradbury, Extro-4