posted
I think that would be great. Think of the women who don't have the right equipment themselves. No sticky questions of surrogate motherhood. Men could have children without even having to worry about a partner....
Then again, this might not be such a good idea. Posts: 410 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:So I'm curious. If they did this and eventually perfected a method of IVF to artifical womb reproduction that bypassed natural reproduction entirely a la Brave New World, you would be okay with this so long as there wasn't any intentional killing of any embryos/babies?
Actually, I haven't decided yet. It's a complex question, but the absolutely insurmountable barrier would be removed.
There's a difference between what I consider worthy of being made illegal (which is where I put the creation and subsequent destruction of a human embryo) and things I think are immoral but should not be made illegal. If no humans (as I define them) are being killed, I might place the activities in the immoral but should not be illegal category, or I might consider them not immoral.
posted
I read a cool book about a clone in the future.
"The House of the Scorpion" - by Nancy Farmer,
Clones are illegally made for spare parts and injected with something that makes them vegetables for their life, and their treated like livestock/filth. Except for Matt who is a clone of the worlds most powerful/insane man. A really great read.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I highly recommend the book Where Late the Sweet Birds Sing where a plague kills of humanity's ability to sexually reproduce, and the only surviving group does so because of cloning.
Posts: 751 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oooh! Thanks for the suggestions. I'll have to look them up.
The best reference I'd seen in fiction in the past had been Nueromancer by William Gibson. See: 3Jane.
Posts: 410 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
