www.ditl.org

I think that the point is that in the 'Trek universe, there would supposedly be no particular desire to have children who were or weren't homosexual.

Teaos wrote:What choice? They dont choose to be gay. They just are.

Sorry, wrong phrase. I mean no reason to hide it like their is in RL.

Mikey wrote:I think that the point is that in the 'Trek universe, there would supposedly be no particular desire to have children who were or weren't homosexual.

Again it could be correlated to stopping other potential problems.

But beyond that somehow Humans seem to be able to make up the bulk of a starfleet composed of a ton of different worlds and have colonies all over. Somebody has to be breeding like crazy. Heck maybe that explains the whole no money thing. What the Federation needs is people to be humping like rabbits.

They dont have money thet get paid in Viagra.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Cpl Kendall wrote:Patrick is a terrific actor but even he can only do so much with what he's given.

It's certainly clear that at times the writers weren't thinking straight when they wrote certainly lines. A Frenchman bragging about Trafalgar?

Great, now I've got an idea for a thread...

sunnyside wrote:

Mikey wrote:I think that the point is that in the 'Trek universe, there would supposedly be no particular desire to have children who were or weren't homosexual.

Again it could be correlated to stopping other potential problems.

But beyond that somehow Humans seem to be able to make up the bulk of a starfleet composed of a ton of different worlds and have colonies all over. Somebody has to be breeding like crazy. Heck maybe that explains the whole no money thing. What the Federation needs is people to be humping like rabbits.

With the overwhelming majority of humanity in a 150+ member Federation, I would say that birth rate/population size is one thing that they DON'T need to worry about.

To be fair it is said starships tend to be crewed with a majority of one race. Which makes sense since all species require different enviroments.

The only place we see where you would expect to find a lot of aliens is DS9. And we do see more than the normal amount,

Even on DS9, the majority of Fed personnel are human, even if it's not the overwhelming majority we usually see. And in mixed-species crews, there IS an overwhelming human majority.

Teaos wrote:Its bias to want your kid to have children naturally?

To want them to be like you?

Yes.

Well I guess there must be a lot of bias people out there then.

Teaos wrote:Well I guess there must be a lot of bias people out there then.

Well, that's ALWAYS been true.

I dont have anything against gay people. One of my best friends is gay.

But given the choice to tick that box I would.

Teaos wrote:Well I guess there must be a lot of bias people out there then.

Definitely. But we're getting better, thankfully.

Teaos wrote:I dont have anything against gay people. One of my best friends is gay.

But given the choice to tick that box I would.

These two statements are contradictory. Either you wouldn't tick the box, or you DO have something against gay people.

If I can make a point. Obviously persecuting someone because he happens to be homosexual is wrong and they deserve to have all the rights heterosexual people have marriage and adoption included.
That being said let us not pretend that there is nothing wrong with homosexuals. Sexuality exists primarily for procreation and if you are attracted to the same sex that defeats the purpose. Therefore by flipping the "switch" you are giving your child an option to procreate with the person he or she loves and that biological imperative will not disappear in 300 years. Obviously not all people will want to have children with their partners but this leaves them a choice.
KILLING homosexuals is wrong but I don't see what is ethically wrong with current generations of homosexuals not being replaced by future generations.