Gay Rights, Women’s Rights, and Technology
January 17, 2007 · By Tom Cerber
Barbara Kay has fun discussing the implications of research conducted by Oregon State University scientists who have found that hormone treatment has “straightened” gay sheep:
Such a breakthrough could enormously benefit people in the sheep-breeding business. But further research along these lines might eventually lead to something as rudimentary as a hormonal patch for pregnant women that would reduce or eliminate the possibility of a homosexual child. The Oregon State professor leading the study, Charles Roselli, believes that potentially “the techniques could one day be adapted for human use, with doctors perhaps being able to offer parents prenatal tests to determine the likely sexuality of offspring or a hormonal treatment to change the orientation of the child.”
Technological advances and the problematic consequences in their wake from unfettered access to abortion have thus far not budged pro-choice ideologues. Abortion on demand coupled with sex forecasting, for example, has resulted in a virtual gendercide amongst some cultural communities, but feminists will not back down from their monolithic political stance.
How then can those who support a woman’s unconditional right to kill her own healthy female fetus logically balk at a benign intervention that will optimize the chances of a living child having the sexual orientation preferred by the parents? Invoking state protection of a fetus’s “right to be gay” — as if the fetus itself had somehow chosen its own sexual identity — would vitiate the very principle upon which abortion rights depend, namely, that women’s wishes must always take precedence over fetal rights.
Kay also could have cited the examples of deaf women genetically modifying their embryos to ensure deaf children.
The point here is that once the woman’s sovereignty over her fetus is recognized, no one can complain when she chooses to make decisions that will offend others, in this case gays. But no no, I doubt this is the last we’ve heard of it.
I would say this is an example of the Edgar Syndrome (explained here), a phenomenon in which clashing orthodoxies of political correctness make its advocates squirm – a lot.