# Sorry, SHAKES, but yes, you ARE a bigot **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 13, 2004, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925 "2004-07-13T17:22:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Cazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cazzle/32/75_2.png) [@Cazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cazzle)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/141 "2004-07-18T11:30:47Z")
> [@SHAKES](#): > > I’m probably going to regret asking this but here it goes anyway. > > As a parent your doctor tells you that your child will be born gay. He also tells you there is a completely safe procedure they can perform to make him NOT be born gay. > > Do you have the procedure done? Can they make his eyes blue instead of brown while they’re at it? Oh, and I want a right-handed son, not a lefty. And I’d prefer not to have a child with freckles, asthma, or myopia. ---
**Author:** ![Siege](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dbc845/32.png) [@Siege](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siege)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/142 "2004-07-18T11:36:43Z")
**SHAKES** , me boyo, there is such a procedure; it’s called, generically, “abortion”. I’ve read that in India and China girls are much more likely to be aborted than boys because boys are seen as more desirable. If I were to learn that my child was gay, I admit I’d feel a twinge of regret because life is harder for homosexuals but probably less of one than the one I’d feel when I realized they were taking after me. On the other hand, one reason life is harder for homosexuals is because of idiots like _you_! In other words, no, I wouldn’t have the operation done, any more than I’d do what it would take to remove that genetic quirk I mentioned earlier Tell you what. There are a bunch of gay people on this message board and in real life who I like a great deal. You, I don’t like at all. Rather than get rid of all the gay people, I say we get rid of twits like you. The way I intend to do so is the good, old, SDMB way of giving you facts about homosexuality and by making it clear that cruelty, malice, and predjudice do far more harm to people than who someone you’ve never met is attracted to. I’m sorry. I was told I didn’t deserve to live because I was different. For a while, I believed that strongly enough that I tried to kill myself. As a moral human being, I cannot stand by while people like you tell homosexuals they shouldn’t live, even if it’s by asking if people want them cured at birth. Getting back to the example in my first paragraph, if there were a procedure to force a fetus to become male, rather than female, would you choose it and what would you think of someone who would? Is that any more or less right than your question about making a child not be born gay? CJ ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/143 "2004-07-18T11:40:03Z")
> [@cazzle](#): > > Can they make his eyes blue instead of brown while they’re at it? Oh, and I want a right-handed son, not a lefty. And I’d prefer not to have a child with freckles, asthma, or myopia. I’m not sure I understand your point. I’d like to have a blue-eyed child, simply because I think blue eyes are pretty. I shouldn’t have to feel bad for thinking that. I’d also want my kid to be a righty, since the world is built for right-handed folk and it’s not such a hassle for us. Freckles can go either way, they look good on some people and bad on some people. I would say they are a “neutrally desirable” trait. You totally lost me at asthma and myopia. You’re fucking right I wouldn’t want my kid to have those. Is that what you’re saying, err, what the hell _are_ you saying? ---
**Author:** ![Cazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cazzle/32/75_2.png) [@Cazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cazzle)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/144 "2004-07-18T12:29:36Z")
Just wondering how far he’s prepared to take the genetic engineering argument. You’d prefer a blue-eyed child because you like blue eyes better? Would you play the genetic lottery, or would you take SHAKES scientific breakthrough up and have your child altered in the womb to have eyes you find more pleasing? Obviously your reaction shows you wouldn’t have a problem using the technology to cure “defects” like asthma or myopia, but do you think there is an ethical limit to using this technology? For me, that line is drawn way before we reach “curing” homosexuality in the womb, as I personally would be reluctant to utilize it for anything but the most critical disfunctions if at all. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/145 "2004-07-18T14:21:22Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > A more scatterbrained statement can scarcely be imagined. He states that belief only clouds objective analytical ability — set aside that an entire field of logic (doxasticism) is dedicated to objective analysis of belief — and the reason that he believes that is because he believes that no one should have beliefs, a belief that is, according to him, his only belief and which, according to him, therefore clouds his objective analytical ability. I believe he is a nut. Alas, you have discovered the beauty of this statement. However, like most of the students you quickly resorted to criticism, protection of what you “know” and downright insults. This is exactly what I was referring to. Humans are prone to belief systems and we only can begin to educate (fight ignorance) ourselves when we deconstruct our own beliefs first. The student who says, “hey wait a minute, you just said you have a belief” is understanding that the nature of humanity is to cling to something. This is good because then he will use the opportunity to demonstrate that no human can truly have no beliefs, fundamental assertions about culture, or typifications, are the only way we can process and understand the world around us. Rather it is the willingness to admit it and re-examine ones own belief system that truly ushers in education. On the other hand, those who say, “but beliefs are central to our system of order”, are challenged to define order and learn that many social theorists assert that any given “order” is designed to benefit particular groups. However, the vast majority simply go into the little protective box. It is a critical thinking exercise. Those who embrace it and analyze the statement, and their own system of beliefs, are taking the first step towards education. Those who simply sneak back into their little protective shells are avoiding it. They throw out insults, spout what they “know” to be true and miss the entire point. Finally, the objective analysis of a belief is possible, but I am certain you would agree that if those individuals carry their own sets of beliefs into the analysis the result will be inherently flawed. Henceforth, the main point is still there. Beliefs cloud our objective analytical ability. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/146 "2004-07-18T14:52:34Z")
Actually, beliefs form the very basis of our objective analytical ability. All deductive reason is based upon induced axioms. We believe, for example, that for every N that is a natural number, there must be an N + 1 that is also a natural number. We cannot prove this, but we take it as axiomatic, and along with four other axioms, we prove that 1 + 1 = 2. A teacher who turns to a roomful of students and declares that he has only one belief is either a fool, an idiot, a liar, or a comedian. The very first postulate of doxastic logic is that every agent of belief believes that he believes; thus, if you believe X, then you believe that you believe X. Therefore, objectively and analytically speaking, it is impossible that the teacher has only one belief. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/147 "2004-07-18T16:48:58Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Actually, beliefs form the very basis of our objective analytical ability. All deductive reason is based upon induced axioms. We believe, for example, that for every N that is a natural number, there must be an N + 1 that is also a natural number. We cannot prove this, but we take it as axiomatic, and along with four other axioms, we prove that 1 + 1 = 2. A teacher who turns to a roomful of students and declares that he has only one belief is either a fool, an idiot, a liar, or a comedian. The very first postulate of doxastic logic is that every agent of belief believes that he believes; thus, if you believe X, then you believe that you believe X. Therefore, objectively and analytically speaking, it is impossible that the teacher has only one belief. That is exactly what I said, just in different terms. What is preventing you from seeing that? It is an exercise in critical thinking. It tests the students to see who among them will say, “wait a minute, that is a belief”, who among them will crawl into their protective shell and start flinging insults and who among them will ultimately understand that it is the quest to deconstruct beliefs, starting with your own, that leads to education. Ironically, you would probably get along with this professor very well. Nonetheless, I believe this hijack has lasted long enough. My point was, there is no reason arguing with someone who, when pushed into a corner, simply states “well I have a belief”. Hopefully you and I can agree on that and then agree to disagree on the other subject discussed herein. ---
**Author:** ![Ninja\_Pizza\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f04885/32.png) [@Ninja\_Pizza\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ninja_Pizza_Guy)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/148 "2004-07-18T18:05:03Z")
> [@SHAKES](#): > > I’m probably going to regret asking this but here it goes anyway. > > As a parent your doctor tells you that your child will be born gay. He also tells you there is a completely safe procedure they can perform to make him NOT be born gay. > > Do you have the procedure done? How about a procedure to ensure the child doesn’t become a bigot? ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/149 "2004-07-18T20:23:13Z")
> [@SHAKES](#): > > I’m probably going to regret asking this but here it goes anyway. > > As a parent your doctor tells you that your child will be born gay. He also tells you there is a completely safe procedure they can perform to make him NOT be born gay. > > Do you have the procedure done? Now we’re watching Shakes move into eugenics. How nice. He lives down to every expectation, is immune thus far to education, and people were willing to pillory me for my sarcasm and vitriol. I do believe in educating people and positive debate. I do not see that Shakes is really absorbing anything. He goes from one tack to another, disingenously moving from point to point, I think more enjoying fomenting discord than anything else. Why do we continue to feed him? ---
**Author:** ![SolGrundy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbce88/32.png) [@SolGrundy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SolGrundy)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/150 "2004-07-18T21:08:40Z")
> [@SHAKES](#): > > I’m probably going to regret asking this but here it goes anyway. > > As a parent your doctor tells you that your child will be born gay. He also tells you there is a completely safe procedure they can perform to make him NOT be born gay. > > Do you have the procedure done? No. Even if such a thing were possible, I don’t think that that’s in the realm of humans to decide. There’s a reason people are different; I don’t know what the reason is, but I have to assume that there is one. To bring up the handed-ness analogy again: if I knew that my child were going to be born left-handed, and I could have a procedure to make him right-handed, I wouldn’t do that, either. Sure, the kid is going to have other kids making fun of the way he writes, and he’s going to have a tough time finding a comfortable computer mouse to use, but it would be pointless to change him just because of that. Of course homosexuality is a bigger deal than handed-ness. You asked before: “If I removed a pimple from your ass, wouldn’t you still be SolGrundy?” Sure, I would. But I don’t know if I’d still be the same person had I not grown up being gay. I like to think that being gay is about the least interesting thing about me, but I have no idea how much of me is defined by it. Plus, the idea of wiping certain traits out just because they’re currently socially unacceptable, is just creepy. Wouldn’t it be better to just assume that God knows what He’s doing, let the kid come out whichever we he’s going to, and work on making the world an easier place for him to live in? ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/151 "2004-07-19T04:41:28Z")
> [@SolGrundy](#): > > No. Even if such a thing were possible, I don’t think that that’s in the realm of humans to decide. There’s a reason people are different; I don’t know what the reason is, but I have to assume that there is one. To bring up the handed-ness analogy again: if I knew that my child were going to be born left-handed, and I could have a procedure to make him right-handed, I wouldn’t do that, either. Sure, the kid is going to have other kids making fun of the way he writes, and he’s going to have a tough time finding a comfortable computer mouse to use, but it would be pointless to change him just because of that. > > Of course homosexuality is a bigger deal than handed-ness. You asked before: “If I removed a pimple from your ass, wouldn’t you still be SolGrundy?” Sure, I would. But I don’t know if I’d still be the same person had I not grown up being gay. I like to think that being gay is about the least interesting thing about me, but I have no idea how much of me is defined by it. > > Plus, the idea of wiping certain traits out just because they’re currently socially unacceptable, is just creepy. Wouldn’t it be better to just assume that God knows what He’s doing, let the kid come out whichever we he’s going to, and work on making the world an easier place for him to live in? **Sol** , if we ever meet face-to-face, I think I owe you a beer. In the face of constant criticism/ignorance/whatever you want to call it, you have done more for the notion of dispelling ignorance, and all the while, you have not been the least bit condescending, exasperated, or anything else. You are to be truly commended. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/152 "2004-07-19T05:09:48Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Actually, beliefs form the very basis of our objective analytical ability. All deductive reason is based upon induced axioms. We believe, for example, that for every N that is a natural number, there must be an N + 1 that is also a natural number. We cannot prove this, but we take it as axiomatic, and along with four other axioms, we prove that 1 + 1 = 2. A teacher who turns to a roomful of students and declares that he has only one belief is either a fool, an idiot, a liar, or a comedian. The very first postulate of doxastic logic is that every agent of belief believes that he believes; thus, if you believe X, then you believe that you believe X. Therefore, objectively and analytically speaking, it is impossible that the teacher has only one belief. Tell me, **Lib** : if you were teaching a child to read, would you start with _Dick and Jane_ or _War and Peace_? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925/153 "2004-07-19T07:28:51Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > That is exactly what I said, just in different terms. What is preventing you from seeing that? Um, expository skill? > [@Miller](#): > > Tell me, Lib: if you were teaching a child to read, would you start with Dick and Jane or War and Peace? Between those two, probably _Dick and Jane_, although the first book that I can recall reading was _Madame Bovary_. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sorry-shakes-but-yes-you-are-a-bigot/254925.md?page=7)