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.
Thus is the "progressive" side dissected for the mechanistic parody of humanity which is its goal.
Reps to you.
In fairness, I believe the language of "rights" is overused. I'm more of a utilitarian, and I'm also not a "conservative" in that sense. I just don't see how anybody has a right to a test-tube baby, especially when what they want would be biologically impossible without technology.
Really... so if I have a right to have children, how do I exercise that right? I'm a male. Is it OK to go rape somebody to exercise that right? That sounds absurb but how can this right be expressed?
My point is thus: the suppossed "right" to have children is dependent on interconnected social relationships, not some kind of absolute. What about this doctor's right to follow his conscience? 50 years ago nobody would be arguing about the "right" for two lesbians to have children, it was impossible to do without a man being involved.
because the technology did not exist.. Technology has a direct and indirect effect on our culture and social norms. It provides new opportunities and interconnected social relationships.. two lesbians wanting a child 50 years ago.. had to draw straws on who wanted to sleep with a man... you're right.. but 50 years ago.. we couldn't be discussing this issue on a message board out in cyber space either...
If you want to really discuss the issue.. don't just pick and choose examples of technology that promote your personal ideals or agenda... look at the big picture.. maybe then you will understand the relationship of technology to the social interactions of human beings as well as the future possibilities of where we might go as a society...
we can all sit and say 50 years ago this.. and 50 years ago that... but their daily social life and interaction was nothing like today.. thats comparing apples to oranges...
In fairness, I believe the language of "rights" is overused. I'm more of a utilitarian, and I'm also not a "conservative" in that sense. I just don't see how anybody has a right to a test-tube baby, especially when what they want would be biologically impossible without technology.
if a man has given consent to donate his sperm.. knowing that it would be for sale for anyone to purchase for the production of a baby.. and it is available for a lesbian couple to use.. then there's your answer.. they do have a right to a test tube baby.. consent was given.. all parties respected.. just like how 50 years ago.. if I wanted to talk to you.. I would have to leave my house and drive to where you are.. now we can do it this way...
That's the effects of technology...but it hasn't undermined anyone's rights.. and does have a right to happen... unless we make the technology and practice illegal... and then you must back it up with evidence and reasoning as to why it should be illegal...
if you are a utilitarian.. then the technology itself is your answer.. the utility to allow it is in place.. only leaving a moral argument of if its right...
we all have half the reproductive puzzle.. therefore giving us the right to bring our half into the social wrealm in search of the other half.. whether it be someone of the opposite sex to engage in intercourse.. or someone of the opposite sex who has donated their half to the highest bidder
What about the interests of a potential child, or a doctor to follow his conscience? Just because we can do something, doesn't make it right. I don't think anybody, including children, should merely exist as a means to a human end, even if it is to make somebody else happy.
"Donated to the highest bidder"- see, human life should never be a commodity. People are not use objects for somebody else, and if you go down that road it is a quite slipper slope.
What about the interests of a potential child, or a doctor to follow his conscience? Just because we can do something, doesn't make it right. I don't think anybody, including children, should merely exist as a means to a human end, even if it is to make somebody else happy.
"Donated to the highest bidder"- see, human life should never be a commodity. People are not use objects for somebody else, and if you go down that road it is a quite slipper slope.
but it is treated as such all the time in our society... and it doesn't always involve abortion...We restrict life.. we control life... we even take life away from certain people if that is their punishment..
We go to work to be able to afford "things" to make our lives more valuable and meaningful.. or easier...
Life has value... everyone puts different value on it.. for different reasons...
that is why CHOICE is acceptable.. so long as it is not infringing on other's rights..and what they wish to do with their reproductive assets... science must be able to prove at what level a fetus is a person with cognative ability to render it having rights...
believe me.. I agree with you.. I'm just not totally sold on the idea that a 6 or 10 week old fetus is developed to that stage warranting it rights...
are we addressing the evidence of the issue... or the ideology of it??? Hindering of a life that is forming and is not yet anything of cognative ability is different from hindering of a life that is.... and there certainly is a difference between ending a human life.. and ending the Possibility of a human life....as well as planning for and creating a human life.. whether it be by conventional standards.. or with medical technology...
reality of it is.. if it wasn't for all our modern science and technology in regards to medicine... the mortality rate would be SOOOO much higher than it is...
who gets to decide the who what and how when it comes to personal reproductive rights? because like I said earlier... you could live in china and they'll answer that question for you...
Life has value... everyone puts different value on it.. for different reasons...
that is why CHOICE is acceptable..
My comments have nothing to do with abortion. I'm saying that technology has to have moral restraint with its use. If a doctor creates a human child, the doctor is just as much a partner in that process as the person that will carry that child. Asking a doctor to share in that against his will is wrong. Perhaps the doctors should get out of the in-vitro fertilization business. If enough of them leave, then people will get the message.
My comments have nothing to do with abortion. I'm saying that technology has to have moral restraint with its use. If a doctor creates a human child, the doctor is just as much a partner in that process as the person that will carry that child. Asking a doctor to share in that against his will is wrong. Perhaps the doctors should get out of the in-vitro fertilization business. If enough of them leave, then people will get the message.
but who gets to decide on all those issues... especially in-vitro???
if its possible to do.... who gets to say... YOU CAN"T DO IT??? and if you say people can't.. there needs to be a valid reason why... and it can't be related to religion.. it has to be in context of the constitution not the bible or any other dogmatic belief on the issue... factual evidence to support a reason why it is harmful or wrong... there are plenty of people who have families of their own thru this process.. and not all of them are gay couples.. what about them??? I think you are atleast addressing the issue as a whole.. where as most people on this message board are not against in-vitro.. they're just against certain people being able to use it...
and not all of them are gay couples.. what about them??? I think you are atleast addressing the issue as a whole.. where as most people on this message board are not against in-vitro.. they're just against certain people being able to use it...
I don't pretend to have the answers but it's interesting that society has embraced in-vitro fertilization without thinking about all the consequences. This really is not unique, though, to that particular technology. What is new is the pace of technological change is increasing quickly.
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.
