Turn on thread page Beta

Why don't we just grow babies in a test tube? watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greenlaner)
    Yes, let's take one of the most natural and beautiful life experiences, suck all the humanity out of it, and turn it into just another cold, clinical, procedure.

    And while we are at it, let's go full sociopath and cut down all the real trees and replace them artificial ones that will do the same job of producing oxygen as real trees, with the added bonus that they don't need pruning, won't catch diseases and will never die. Sure they might not be as aesthetically pleasing as real trees, but who cares about such trivial matters, function and efficiency is all matters in our brave new world.
    Please stop appealing to nature.

    Giving birth is not beautiful.
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=woman+giving+child+birth&l=1

    Humanity isn't relevant.

    You still get a child out of it? If you find that much love in the procedure, shouldn't a child alone be just as good?

    Whether something is aesthetically pleasing or not isn't a trivial matter.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BookBird)
    Giving birth sucks ass but it's an experience most women willingly want to go through, myself included. To take away that would be taking away yet another reproductive right from us.
    Did he say take away the right?

    (Original post by Supersaps)
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    snip
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Also get to play god :evil:
    It's terrifying that people actually think like this.
    What's wrong with wanting to be a God?

    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    Birth is not beautiful, it is disgusting.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    +1 (can't atm because I've repped you recently)

    (Original post by Serine Soul)
    What if there's a powercut?
    Back-ups
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    Did he say take away the right?
    Okay so if you had properly read through most of the replies you would have realised that this fact has already been presented to me multiple times.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BookBird)
    Okay so if you had properly read through most of the replies you would have realised that this fact has already been presented to me multiple times.
    Don't go Yuno on me. :s (You sound passive aggressive now. )

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BookBird)
    Okay so if you had properly read through most of the replies you would have realised that this fact has already been presented to me multiple times.
    As punishment you will be reminded on a daily basis.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I think that you would struggle to provide an artificial womb which would provide as healthy a growing environment for a baby as the womb. The stimulation that the child gets is not irrelevant. Also there is the issue surrounding breast feeding and the benefits of passing on immunity as that wouldn't be triggered if the woman didn't carry the child.

    Personally even if this was an option I wouldn't consider it. My pregnancy though no easy was one of the more incredible experiences I have ever had and I couldn't imagine forgoing it just to be handed a baby after 9 months.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Between this and sexbots Japanese herbivore men would have it cracked and maybe they could start to repopulate within their own culture.👶👶👶👶
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    We each have our sperm and eggs frozen at say like 18-21. Then later in life when we have a partner and we are ready to have a baby we just use our stored eggs + sperm, stick em together, and let the baby grow in an artificial womb.

    It must be possible. If we crack the science it then just becomes an engineering/economic problem :beard:

    Not only would we solve the whole people having babies to late we would also get rid of the whole having to give birth thing for women.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Also get to play god :evil:
    This would solve so many problems... I actually agree to some point. But that's because I don't want to squeeze a something melon sized out of my love making hole.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I think that you would struggle to provide an artificial womb which would provide as healthy a growing environment for a baby as the womb. The stimulation that the child gets is not irrelevant. Also there is the issue surrounding breast feeding and the benefits of passing on immunity as that wouldn't be triggered if the woman didn't carry the child.

    Personally even if this was an option I wouldn't consider it. My pregnancy though no easy was one of the more incredible experiences I have ever had and I couldn't imagine forgoing it just to be handed a baby after 9 months.
    Lesbians couples have successfully taken hormones so both women can breast feed. It's not impossible

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersaps)
    It's terrifying that people actually think like this.
    Try being a woman about to give birth its not as terrifying as that. Test tube option anyday.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.