An artificial womb would be device that can turn an embryo into a human baby without the use of a human female. If a female falls pregnant, she can elect to go through with the pregnancy or have the embryo extracted from her uterus and placed in an artificial womb. A third option is the option that females have now and that is to simply destroy the embryo. But if we had the technology to give the embryo life without forcing a female to go through pregnancy and child birth, what would this make a decision to destroy embryo?
I don’t think the Creator would appreciate this…
Who’s gonna raise all these babies?
You?
It would probably make it even more common for young women to be promiscuous and careless, and not be held responsible for their decisions.
I’m not letting any of my DNA out into the world. And certainly not going to allow someone else to raise it.
They’ll probably claim that it’s a “life” and so you can’t kill it.
As usual.
Let’s see these “artificial wombs” around everywhere, then we’ll talk.
Until then, I am resolutely pro-choice
This is treating human life just as contemptuously, though you can’t see it.
How about this : It is an innocent life, a gift, a unique irrepeatable being.
i think that would be a great idea then we dont have to kill the baby you can still have it live and it would create jobs for people to watch over all these children
More reasons that “absolute” truths are a bad idea. You can’t have absolutes when your society changes so frequently.
I honestly don’t think that it would change much about the abortion issue. Because it is far more than not just wanting to be pregnant- it is about not wanting to take responsibility for the child. There may be a few that would opt to have the embryo extracted and placed in an artificial womb, but not 4,000 a day. I counseled women for over 10 years, and the main reason was not that they did not want to go through with the pregnancy. The main reason the women were choosing abortion was because they did not want to parent. What about the best option ever – adoption? does any one think of that these days?
Awesome question! I often think the “woman’s body” argument is just a red herring to distract us from the real issue — killing human beings. Why do I think this? Because “pro-choice” people don’t have any objections to experimenting on and/or destroying human embryos who AREN’T in anyone else’s body.
This would make it harder for “pro-choice” people to hide behind “it’s a woman’s body” and they’d have to more directly argue for the “right” to kill early stage human beings.
This is what you’re missing. Science proves that the embryo IS a human. It doesn’t TURN into a human.
For everyone who is now mad at me: This is true, and this is science. Go ahead… thumbs-down me. Be that way. Be an idiot. Go ahead and say that Christians ignore science, and then be a hypocrite and ignore it yourself.
Incorrect Atheist: Have you ever considered that there are absolutes, and we’re just… WRONG?
Some women NEVER want to reproduce or pass on their genes. I don’t think they should be forced to do so. Who will adopt all these feoti? What about the children already in the system? Shouldn’t they be first priority?