Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As it happens, I agree with you on this, at least for now.
But what happens when it is no longer an experimental procedure, but a well-established one? Now I'm sure I'll be dead by the time this happens, so I have no skin in this speculative exercise, but I think my grandkids will be living in a far different world when they are the age I am now.
I guess I just don't understand all this fascination with the 'miracle of birth' when there are so many unwanted children in the world. And I'm not just referring to same sex couples.
If a couple can't get pregnant - there is no shame in adopting. I have two good friends who adopted infant girls from other countries. Beautiful girls; happy families. What is the point of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on trying to have your own and there are zero guarantees of success?
I gave birth; it ain't all sunshine and roses and neither is 9 months of being pregnant. My least favorite stage is newborn - if could have gone straight to 6 months old that would have been fine with me.
I guess I just don't understand all this fascination with the 'miracle of birth' when there are so many unwanted children in the world. And I'm not just referring to same sex couples.
If a couple can't get pregnant - there is no shame in adopting. I have two good friends who adopted infant girls from other countries. Beautiful girls; happy families. What is the point of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on trying to have your own and there are zero guarantees of success?
I gave birth; it ain't all sunshine and roses and neither is 9 months of being pregnant. My least favorite stage is newborn - if could have gone straight to 6 months old that would have been fine with me.
Maybe I'm just different, I don't know.
I prefer to think that people like you and I are just less atavistic!
But the technology is extremely fascinating, and the implications are more far-reaching than just satisfying the demand that your children have your DNA.
Instead of going through all this trouble playing mad scientist, why don't they just talk to women who are considering abortion about paying her medical expenses in exchange for adopting her baby when she has it? Or, adopt a child that is in an orphanage?
Is that what you are plannning on doing if you decide to have a baby, or is that you did when you had one(if you have one). If either of the answer to those questions in no, then that's probably the same reason.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,464,838 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Joshua
Here's a question: Why wouldn't the motive for this be so that actual women with wombs that are incapable of bearing children are able to?
They receive them mainly (women), but they only last long enough for them to have one child, then have to be removed, and the woman needs to take immune suppressors the whole time she has it inside her
Maybe they should just accept the fact that they're really men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by soletaire
Cant find a cure for cancer. Cant find a cure for type 1 diabetes. Cant find a cure for type 2 diabetes. Cant find a cure for HIV. Cant find a cure for Huntingtons disease. Cant find a cure for Sickle Cell. Cant find a cure for Alzheimers disease. Cant find a cure for Lou Gherigs disease.
But they can sure waste millions of tax dollars to satisfy 0.2% of the population who's "disorder" doesnt even need a cure. Yay modern medicine.
Excellent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigCreek
A uterine transplant does not result in biological children. Eggs come from the ovaries, not the uterus. The uterus is the "nest" - not the egg.
Good point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saltine
I would be up in arms if the us taxpayer had to cover such debauchery.
That's precisely why the US can never have any form of national healthcare. It would be so politicized to the point that it causes harm.
Look at the facts:
Federal funding for breast cancer research was $657 Million in 2013, but HIV/AIDS got $2.9 Billion in 2013.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought 54% of population was female.
$39 Million spent on uterine cancer, but STDs/Herpes got $242 Million.
Obesity got $812 Million, while prostate cancer was only worthy of $286 Million.
But they still could not produce biological children as they have no eggs produced by their own body. At best, they could be an incubator if this mad science experiment should work, and at the end just sh*t out the result. Trannies cannot truly change their sex, and at best it's just more cosmetic mutilation with the rest of us expected to go along with the insanity as well as pay for it.
What the hell kind of medical professional spends time working on such freak shows as this?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
