Lets go one step further. Lets say we eliminate "families" all together. People are inseminated and then we extract the baby to grow up being taken care of by the community. No more inherited wealth since there is no new generation to give it to and you will only ever have the success you yourself built up. No such thing as nepotism either.
Not saying it would be perfect but it would definitely be more "fair" and it would kneecap how wealthy the "elite" would be since they can't build up wealth and success over generations. In this regard it would be all around good things.
No it's one of those things humans usually are too good at doing on their own. I see no benefit from this unless you plan colonising the galaxy and you want the ship to be unmanned most of the way through space. It's to early for those kinds of plans. We don't have anything that would survive such a trip today. Every machine would be long dead before it reaches it destination.
hell yes to artificial wombs. men who come and comment on this topic and say otherwise, is because y'all dont know how it feels like to be a woman. the importance of woman in the world. but a lot of men still summarize women to just " something that pushes a baby out" like hello... giving birth is made everyone alive up until now. gosh
to summarize my point, yes, let selfish people know how it is to have babies deprived of a natural bond with their mothers.
I honestly think the world would be the same, if not worse. Even though it goes against some of my personal beliefs and values, I think this could potentially be a good option for women that are infertile or same sex couples that would like to have a child.
And he gave you his love and care and for sure he must love his wife forever and you also gave him his kids, these kids are made by you and him, these kids are the seeds of your love between you and your husband...
Imagine a world where women are not needed. Imagine a world where efficiency is higher as women are taken out of the work force. Imagine a world where actual sciences are done through the scientific method instead of many being censored. Such a world this would create, it sounds pretty gay doesn't it? But strangely enough it would also make men less desire prone.
Honestly, yes and no. It would be good if it gives the chance for people to have children when they biologically cannot - ie infertile people and such. It wouldn't if it becomes a substitute to adoption, denying a good chance at a good life to children who have been abused or abandoned.
Depends on how it would work. Let's say the mother and the father both agree to have a baby and the hole thing is just a way to make women not have to deal with childbirth and delivering. Them fine. If it's used outside if those terms I don't support it.
I donāt think having kids is ethical since itās in a way gambling on a future personās wellbeing, and that there are already kids that exist that need parents. But if our society is insistent on having kids, this manner of reproduction would be the most ethical for it allows us to hopefully rid of all genetic predisposition which may affect wellbeing negatively.
Bonding is an important part of early child development and starts in the womb as the fetus gets used to the mother's movement and voice. I think taking away the early bonding would cause more harm than good.
Do you think if women could get fixed and still have kids later they wouldnāt do it? I like the idea of taking the unique privilege of reproduction out of womenās hands. I want kids but to have kids I require a womanās aid. I think it would be liberating to give men the ability to have their own kids without women.
The idea of a child being created by a machine which presumably is some corporation or the government's is freaky. I would not want to be made that way. I feel like it would fuck with your really important earliest psychological development.
1
3 Reply
Asker
+1 y
I would tend to agree but it's easy to say when it's not my body that grows it
I can't imagine the intimate relationship a baby growing inside it's mother must have. Not just the living sounds of it's mother but ingress of her environment. I would imagine a lifetime of psychological study would follow if we were able to artificially grow babies.
No, because it would give some cult/corporation the power to mass produce humans. That's worse than a zombie apocalypse if you imagine millions of angry people trying to kill/enslave you just because their "mom" told them to.
And upon birth they are not removed only plugged into a machine that simulates the world we live in, where they live totally under control but never know it. We can call it some slick sci-fi name like... "the matrix" 🖐
@alyssa11 i agree with you and i don't think that such things will ever be possible or accepted because that's how god made us, a man and a woman, reproduction and giving birth is a part of something bigger which is the love and union between a man and a woman, this love is translated in a sexual intercourse which will be the seed of creation to a new human being will come to this world and live in a family that consists of a father and a mother...
Technical advancement might never reach the quality or a 100% functioning womb nor creating a sperm!
Why do we even have to think about such things while we have them perfect in us and for free!
I'll always go to the natural way cause it's beautiful and it's the right thing to do, also i don't want a tire from here and a steering where from there... etc, i want the whole car which means the whole package!
Why would we need to have artificial babies when we arenāt going extinct or anything, I donāt think itās necessary unless weāre in some kind of apocoloypse where humanity is at risk of going extinct
Society is past the point of functioning, progress, we need more people, we need better people, workforce, science, we need to go to space so we don't die from unfortunate circumstances.
Lol yes I love thisi idea I don't know why people hate it. People used to hang scientist in past so most people are against progress because they don't like changes but it still happen
no. but it would certainly be more totalitarian. because politics will make it such that only "good people" (in the eyes of the current regime) will be created. a trick hitler tried already by the way.
This would be good, along with some sort of screening to see what people are actually fit to be good parents. Way too many neglectant parents and toxic parents.
Making the baby is a very important part. It's a connection between parents and it's a lot of fun. Children are tough you might as well enjoy making them.
Have you ever read the book Brave New World? Obviously not or you wouldn't ask a question like this. Go and read it then come back to this question and answer it yourself.
There's a potential that it can affect our evolution and babies may have unique problems not noticeable as a baby but can occurs as an adult and I don't wanna risk that to my child.
I love how you're just simply telling anyone what to do. But how about if i tell you, if underpopulation is an issue, fuck as hard as you can. Anyways, the asker is talking about the "world" not Ukraine. If there's no country specified, it implies it's every country.
@Aiko_E_Lara I was talking about countries with low fertility rate and increasing fertility rate is harder than decreasing it. Many countries have decreased their fertility rate how many have significantly increased it? and many are trying actually
Really no one is stopping anyone from taking care of their health. That's also linked to fertility. Sure there's no excuse not to do one child policy to control population. That would also mean there's no excuse for anyone in your low fertility country to start working out instead of eating junk food all day that can cause infertility. Unless you just wanna use that artificial womb to excuse such life style.
And that's why i said overpopulation is a way bigger issue. Still even if that country is under populated, they're still adding more population to Earth. The one child policy to control human population and pollution would be useless if your country would just keep pumping more humans anyways.
You don't realize how flawed your logic is here. Iām not surprised why you go anonymous.
First of all, what does agreeing to one child policy have to do with letting kids die out? If many kids can suffer, isnāt a one child policy a way to control population? Read what I said carefully and analyze it properly before you put words on peopleās mouth.
And secondly, I see you want your country to be like Africa? For what purpose? Because now youāre saying ānormal amount of kidsā. So why would you want a ānormal amountā to be overpopulated like Africa? This is where your logic falls.
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
+1 y
+1 y
Opinion Owner+1 y
