baby-making machines

[Maurepas]

that doesn't sound like a baby making machine... more like an incubator.

Like women,

... you mean those Incubators will be prone to Mood Swings caused by a hormone imbalance?

*Imagines crazed, moody machines running rampant on the city*

I preferre women then... they're much more cuddly, fun to be with, and they are absolutely RADIANT at all times.
please don't hurt me.

*hurts you...brutally*

Although, I would have to agree,

[Kashindahar]

that doesn't sound like a baby making machine... more like an incubator.

Like women,

... you mean those Incubators will be prone to Mood Swings caused by a hormone imbalance?

*Imagines crazed, moody machines running rampant on the city*

I preferre women then... they're much more cuddly, fun to be with, and they are absolutely RADIANT at all times.
please don't hurt me.

wh-ch

[JarVik]

Assuming that you are pro-choice:

If a machine was developed and distributed that would allow pregnant mothers to transfer the pregnancy into the machine, and the machine basically functions as a surrogate womb, with no requirement that the mother have anything to do with the pregnancy from that point on, would you still allow termination of abortions, rather than just transfers?

If so, why?

EDIT: To simplify the issue

The transfer takes exactly as long as an abortion would, and costs the woman exactly as much. Should the woman desire nothing to do with the pregnancy, the costs thereafter are paid for by the government.

And, of course, the money it will cost to maintain these sweet motherless lambs to age eighteen comes from where...?

It's magic, we don't have to explain it.

Magic and unicorns is nice and all, but in the real world there are hard decisions and consequences to be taken into account.

If these machines were available under the circumstances you describe, people would tend to use them more than aboration as abandoment doesn't have the same wrench of conscience that ending a life or potential life has. Similar to how people release their pet goldfish, aligator or dog into the wild when they no longer want them.

So lets say the lifers get this happy land where all abortions end up as state wards instead.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/graphusabrate.html
What is the Govt going to do with 1.2 million new orphens a year? What are the consequences of that many state wards and what would the Govt have to do to pay for it besides army farming?

Why do I a see storm trooper uprising in this future?

[Big Jim P]

Great: let use technology to increase the population instead of, maybe, improving the lives of those already here.

BTW: Baby making machines, internet porn, and artificial vaginas: Exactly how long DOES the human species have left anyway?

[Vault 10]

If a machine was developed and distributed that would allow pregnant mothers to transfer the pregnancy into the machine, and the machine basically functions as a surrogate womb, with no requirement that the mother have anything to do with the pregnancy from that point on, would you still allow termination of abortions, rather than just transfers?

No way. With transfers, we can have millions of 11 year old soldiers, riding into the battle on the armor of M1A2 tanks, shooting at any insurgent aiming at them, and causing premature detonation of the RPG rounds, protecting the expensive steel and ceramic machines.

[JuNii]

Great: let use technology to increase the population instead of, maybe, improving the lives of those already here.

BTW: Baby making machines, internet porn, and artificial vaginas: Exactly how long DOES the human species have left anyway?

... holodecks...

when Virtual Dating becomes easier and better than Real Dating...

[Big Jim P]

Great: let use technology to increase the population instead of, maybe, improving the lives of those already here.

BTW: Baby making machines, internet porn, and artificial vaginas: Exactly how long DOES the human species have left anyway?

... holodecks...

when Virtual Dating becomes easier and better than Real Dating...

shit, holodecks would kill humanity in one generation. I know I'd never come out of one.

[The Alma Mater]

Assuming that you are pro-choice:

If a machine was developed and distributed that would allow pregnant mothers to transfer the pregnancy into the machine, and the machine basically functions as a surrogate womb, with no requirement that the mother have anything to do with the pregnancy from that point on, would you still allow termination of abortions, rather than just transfers?

If so, why?

Sure - why not ? If the mother does not want the clump of cells to become a person, that is her right.
I would like the option you describe to actually exist though.

[Treznor]

So long as these incubation machines do not incur an unwanted obligation on the woman donating the tissue and the children produced by these machines aren't going to look forward to long lives as military conscriptees or medical experiments, then yes I can get behind this.

Of course, if it also means that the population problem we're already losing control over is going to get even worse, then I'd have to make my support far more tentative. Just because the hypothesis here stipulated unlimited capacity by these machines does not automatically infer that we have unlimited resources to support our growing population.

[Flameswroth]

An interesting question. I think that if baby machines existed, they ought to replace abortion as the method of pregnancy termination.

If a mother gets pregnant and can't take care of/doesn't want the baby, have the fetus removed and placed in the baby machine. It's essentially an abortion, save that the fetus remains alive. They can then leave, and when the baby comes to term it can be put up for adoption.

Or even better...used to create an army for the government, brainwashed from birth to want nothing other than to serve the country and die. Yes!

[Flameswroth]

Of course, if it also means that the population problem we're already losing control over is going to get even worse

From what I understand 'overpopulation' is more of a resource-distribution constraint than an overall resource concern. I've heard many times that we have plenty of resources, just that they are not evenly distributed to support the burgeoning populations in some regions.

Now I could be wrong, I suppose, but under that assumption this change would be far less detrimental; the countries that could afford to operate baby-machines in the excess enough to support this act would certainly be those with enough resources to support the increase in population.

[Ashmoria]

Of course, if it also means that the population problem we're already losing control over is going to get even worse

From what I understand 'overpopulation' is more of a resource-distribution constraint than an overall resource concern. I've heard many times that we have plenty of resources, just that they are not evenly distributed to support the burgeoning populations in some regions.

Now I could be wrong, I suppose, but under that assumption this change would be far less detrimental; the countries that could afford to operate baby-machines in the excess enough to support this act would certainly be those with enough resources to support the increase in population.

we have plenty of resources as long as we dont intend to leave any for the rest of the species in the world.

[The Alma Mater]

I am btw somewhat surprised by the number of people that seem to believe an embryo does "deserve" to develop . What is your reason to be pro-choice then ?

[Treznor]

I am btw somewhat surprised by the number of people that seem to believe an embryo does "deserve" to develop . What is your reason to be pro-choice then ?

Because the embryo doesn't "deserve" to develop using a woman's body who doesn't consent to be used that way. The embryo's "rights" do not trump the woman's rights over her own body.

[Kashindahar]

Of course, if it also means that the population problem we're already losing control over is going to get even worse

From what I understand 'overpopulation' is more of a resource-distribution constraint than an overall resource concern. I've heard many times that we have plenty of resources, just that they are not evenly distributed to support the burgeoning populations in some regions.

Now I could be wrong, I suppose, but under that assumption this change would be far less detrimental; the countries that could afford to operate baby-machines in the excess enough to support this act would certainly be those with enough resources to support the increase in population.

we have plenty of resources as long as we dont intend to leave any for the rest of the species in the world.

i didn't murder my way to the top of the food chain to NOT wallow in luxury

[The Alma Mater]

I am btw somewhat surprised by the number of people that seem to believe an embryo does "deserve" to develop . What is your reason to be pro-choice then ?

Because the embryo doesn't "deserve" to develop using a woman's body who doesn't consent to be used that way. The embryo's "rights" do not trump the woman's rights over her own body.

Why does it have any rights in the first place though ? It is only a potential human after all.

Aside:
I prefer the sexy, sexy von neumann machines already in existence:

[Flameswroth]

I am btw somewhat surprised by the number of people that seem to believe an embryo does "deserve" to develop . What is your reason to be pro-choice then ?

Because the embryo doesn't "deserve" to develop using a woman's body who doesn't consent to be used that way. The embryo's "rights" do not trump the woman's rights over her own body.

Why does it have any rights in the first place though ? It is only a potential human after all.

Ugh, let's not go there. Threads about rights are a dime a dozen. But a thread about baby-making machines only comes once in an 'every so often'...


As a side note, I think it'd be interesting to see what women would choose this as a luxury, who were actually going to keep the baby. I've known some women, like my sister-in-law, who loved carrying their first child and feel closer to them for it. Then I know women on their fourth pregnancy who love the baby just as much, but just want it to be out ASAP.

I imagine if a woman chose to utilize a baby-maker with the full intention to keep the baby afterwards, they would have to pay for the continued support. When balanced with the cost they would have incurred at the hospital giving birth, it may just about break even. However, if it were MORE expensive to use a baby-machine than to pay for the natural delivery, I wonder how many women would opt for it for convenience.

I wonder if the hospital would have to repo the baby if the parents couldn't pay the costs. Would this be covered by insurance or not? Government baby-machine bailout in a recession, anyone?

[Alsatian Knights]

Yeah, there is still going to be abortions why you might ask?

The Debate about abortion isn't as black and white as people think it is. What if the woman is impregnated while being raped? What if the baby is the result of incest? Sure there are orphanages but a lot of people don't want the child to eventually come back and haunt them...real bad choice of words there, but whatever, as a result there are still going to be abortions.

[Flameswroth]

What if the woman is impregnated while being raped? What if the baby is the result of incest?

You know it's interesting you should say that. While the first instinct I would have is to give the politically correct answer of it not being the fetus' fault and giving it to the baby-maker would be okay, etc etc...I know that personally I agree with that notion.

In the case of forced sexual intercourse that culminates in pregnancy, it's not about the fetus being a child anymore, or even a lump of cells. It's a symbol of the violation, a result of their successful assault on the girl's person. A child conceived in such a manner, again on my own personal basis, is an abomination; a perversion of the otherwise biologically beautiful process of procreation. I'd want it stamped out and destroyed to spite the person that tried to create it .

Basically, it'd be like killing the alien egg a facehugger put in ya...with the exception that if you fail to kill it it won't pop out of your chest and start killing things. Sort of a weird way to think about it I guess, but anyways...yeah.

[Alsatian Knights]

What if the woman is impregnated while being raped? What if the baby is the result of incest?

You know it's interesting you should say that. While the first instinct I would have is to give the politically correct answer of it not being the fetus' fault and giving it to the baby-maker would be okay, etc etc...I know that personally I agree with that notion.

In the case of forced sexual intercourse that culminates in pregnancy, it's not about the fetus being a child anymore, or even a lump of cells. It's a symbol of the violation, a result of their successful assault on the girl's person. A child conceived in such a manner, again on my own personal basis, is an abomination; a perversion of the otherwise biologically beautiful process of procreation. I'd want it stamped out and destroyed to spite the person that tried to create it .

Basically, it'd be like killing the alien egg a facehugger put in ya...with the exception that if you fail to kill it it won't pop out of your chest and start killing things. Sort of a weird way to think about it I guess, but anyways...yeah.

I've never heard it put that way but yeah my sentiments exactly.

[Galloism]

What if the woman is impregnated while being raped? What if the baby is the result of incest?

You know it's interesting you should say that. While the first instinct I would have is to give the politically correct answer of it not being the fetus' fault and giving it to the baby-maker would be okay, etc etc...I know that personally I agree with that notion.

In the case of forced sexual intercourse that culminates in pregnancy, it's not about the fetus being a child anymore, or even a lump of cells. It's a symbol of the violation, a result of their successful assault on the girl's person. A child conceived in such a manner, again on my own personal basis, is an abomination; a perversion of the otherwise biologically beautiful process of procreation. I'd want it stamped out and destroyed to spite the person that tried to create it .

Basically, it'd be like killing the alien egg a facehugger put in ya...with the exception that if you fail to kill it it won't pop out of your chest and start killing things. Sort of a weird way to think about it I guess, but anyways...yeah.

This is one of the weirdest lines of reasoning I've ever seen on NSG.

[JuNii]

Great: let use technology to increase the population instead of, maybe, improving the lives of those already here.

BTW: Baby making machines, internet porn, and artificial vaginas: Exactly how long DOES the human species have left anyway?

... holodecks...

when Virtual Dating becomes easier and better than Real Dating...

shit, holodecks would kill humanity in one generation. I know I'd never come out of one.

and the problem is that alot of people won't come OUT of one. but IN one?

[Alsatian Knights]

What if the woman is impregnated while being raped? What if the baby is the result of incest?

You know it's interesting you should say that. While the first instinct I would have is to give the politically correct answer of it not being the fetus' fault and giving it to the baby-maker would be okay, etc etc...I know that personally I agree with that notion.

In the case of forced sexual intercourse that culminates in pregnancy, it's not about the fetus being a child anymore, or even a lump of cells. It's a symbol of the violation, a result of their successful assault on the girl's person. A child conceived in such a manner, again on my own personal basis, is an abomination; a perversion of the otherwise biologically beautiful process of procreation. I'd want it stamped out and destroyed to spite the person that tried to create it .

Basically, it'd be like killing the alien egg a facehugger put in ya...with the exception that if you fail to kill it it won't pop out of your chest and start killing things. Sort of a weird way to think about it I guess, but anyways...yeah.

This is one of the weirdest lines of reasoning I've ever seen on NSG.

He/she got a place on my Regional Forums "Interesting Quotations from NS Forums" thready.