Artificial Wombs: Is A Sexless Reproduction Society In Our Future?

[Asrokhel]

Cutting-edge research around the world will soon launch a new era in human procreation ? a world in which embryos can be ?brought to term? in artificial wombs, replacing traditional pregnancies.

In "Like a Virgin: How Science is Redefining the Rules of Sex," author and genetic scientists, Aarathi Prasad writes, "This might be the biological and social equalizer, a truly new way of thinking about sex."

Cornell University's Dr. Hung-Ching Liu has engineered endometrial tissues by prompting cells to grow in an artificial uterus. When Liu introduced a mouse embryo into the lab-created uterine lining, "It successfully implanted and grew healthy," she said in this New Atlantis Magazine article. Scientists predict the research could produce an animal womb by 2020, and a human model by early 2030s.

In Japan, Juntendo University researcher Yosinori Kuwabara and his team kept goat fetuses growing for ten days. While this womb was only a prototype, Kuwabara predicts that a fully functioning artificial womb capable of gestating a human fetus will evolve in the near future.

However, ethicists voice concerns that this technology could endanger the very meaning of life. Mother-child relationships, the nature of female bodies, and being 'born', not 'made' all play a role in defining how most people around the world view this magical state of existence called life. Artificial wombs will enable both men and women to reproduce entirely alone, removing intercourse from the reproductive equation.

But proponents believe people will reason, "Why risk gestating the baby in a biological womb, when this new science can produce a child with our exact genetic makeup, perfect personality, and zero flaws."

"The womb is a dark and dangerous place, a hazardous environment," says University of Virginia Professor Joseph Fletcher. Fetuses are 100% dependent on their mom's health and sensible judgment. If the mother falls prey to accidents, disease, or inadequate nutrition, the embryo can become traumatized.

Although naysayers believe that this bold science makes us less human, most experts predict that artificial wombs will one day be accepted by mainstream society as more people recognize its many benefits. Babies would no longer be exposed to alcohol or illegal drugs by careless mothers, and the correct body temperature would always be maintained, with 100% of necessary nutrients provided.

Concerns over losing emotional bond between mother and newborn are unwarranted, say scientists. Artificial intelligence advances expected over the next two decades will enable doctors to reproduce exact parent emotions and personalities via vocal recordings, movement, and other sensations. The developing infant would be maintained in a safe secure environment, connected electronically to the mother 24/7.

In the near term though, experts predict most women will probably gestate their children the old-fashioned way; but career-minded females might welcome a concept that allows them to bear children and raise a family without becoming pregnant, a physical condition that often weakens their job status.

Ultimately, this technology would enable anyone ? single, married, male, female, young, old, heterosexual or gay ? to combine DNA from his or her own body with another person; and the gene pool marches on; a clean birth without pain or morning sickness.

As this science matures, people could freeze eggs and sperm in their teen years when they are most physically fit; then create children later when ready for a family. Artificial wombs may sound radical, but people already donate eggs and sperm to create life in a lab and bring it to term in a surrogate mother.

In an unusual twist, this technology offers justification to pro-lifers in the abortion debates. Choosing an abortion to protect a mother's health would not be necessary, as artificial wombs could bring all aborted embryos to term. Unwanted pregnancies would no longer mean a death sentence for the unborn.

As we move into the future, this procedure could become the preferred method of birthing; but today, many disagree. Some see artificial wombs as a triumph of modern science; others believe it's the ultimate folly. We ask again; is a sexless reproduction society in our future? Time will tell. Comments welcome.

http://ieet.org/inde...lletier20121113

[Original Poster]

wow nice text .... -_____-

[Marshall Veteran]

It only takes a couple of clicks to make the font readable. I realize you copied and pasted that from the source but you should take the time to format it correctly.

Most people will overlook this based on the small font size alone. Just FYI. :)

[Asrokhel]

It was normal after I checked it the first time, not sure what happened.

[ArialBlue]

I have seen in this in a dystopian film, therefore it must be a bad idea.

[Original Poster]

no! if you cant give birth you are not meant to spread your dna! damn it cant we just have one chance to evolve ?

[Glassed Silver]

no! if you cant give birth you are not meant to spread your dna! damn it cant we just have one chance to evolve ?

Can't tell if serious or...

Glassed Silver:mac

[Roxkis]

I can't give any real reason why but, this just doesn't sit well with me.

I think its a reason nature set things up the way it has. This may have implications

beyond whats foreseeable. Thats what my guts tell me.

[Colin McGregor]

Could be good for single people that don't want a marriage or relationship but want a child. A single father for instance can have a child and not need to pay or find a woman to have said child for him.

[Original Poster]

Can't tell if serious or...

Glassed Silver:mac

im serious, dna should be spread naturally unless there was an unnatural cause as to why you cant make babies this should never be used

[Glassed Silver]

I can't give any real reason why but, this just doesn't sit well with me.

I think its a reason nature set things up the way it has. This may have implications

beyond whats foreseeable. Thats what my guts tell me.

True, but it's not always nature rejecting the possibility.

im serious, dna should be spread naturally unless there was an unnatural cause as to why you cant make babies this should never be used

Ah, I see we can agree here.

Well, I think this might be a great chance for transsexuals however, but I guess this should only ever be made possible after throughout testing.

And by throughout I mean: THROUGHOUT.

Could be good for single people that don't want a marriage or relationship but want a child. A single father for instance can have a child and not need to pay or find a woman to have said child for him.

Sounds very wrong to me, but maybe that's just me.

Mate with each other ffs...

Glassed Silver:mac

[tiagosilva29]

Where's the fun in that?

[Glassed Silver]

Where's the fun in that?

A hole new dimension of masturbator toys... (typo pun intended by the way)

Glassed Silver:mac

[IceBreakerG]

Reminds me of the "virtual sex" thing from Demolition Man.

[ArialBlue]

I can't give any real reason why but, this just doesn't sit well with me.

I think its a reason nature set things up the way it has. This may have implications

beyond whats foreseeable. Thats what my guts tell me.

"And thus man said unto beast that he is man and not beast" ~ a voice in my head

[Growled Member]

I don't see this becoming the next big thing, although I'm sure a few will follow this path.

[Gerowen]

Yet another means to cheat the process of natural selection and contribute to overpopulation. I love science and education, but sometimes I think we should just leave nature alone. The current means of producing children has worked well for millions of years across many different species, let's not go messing around with it.

[Colin McGregor]

Sounds very wrong to me, but maybe that's just me.

Mate with each other ffs...

Glassed Silver:mac

I have no issue mating with each other but the problem lies in the girl wanting a relationship or wanting child support or alimony or any of the other greedy ways they find to get money and do nothing. This way the man can have a baby and take care of it 100% on his terms.

[Glassed Silver]

I have no issue mating with each other but the problem lies in the girl wanting a relationship or wanting child support or alimony or any of the other greedy ways they find to get money and do nothing. This way the man can have a baby and take care of it 100% on his terms.

Sorry dude, but you make it sound like it only matters what the daddy wants.

Be more selective with your partner and your chances are better things will go nicely.

No guarantees, but wishing any guarantees with having children is absurd.

Also, I think that there should always be a real mother and a real dad.

Or in case of adoption (or this new method maybe) any two guardians.

Glassed Silver:mac

[Arceles]

True, but it's not always nature rejecting the possibility.

Ah, I see we can agree here.

Well, I think this might be a great chance for transsexuals however, but I guess this should only ever be made possible after throughout testing.

And by throughout I mean: THROUGHOUT.

Sounds very wrong to me, but maybe that's just me.

Mate with each other ffs...

Glassed Silver:mac

As soon as we find our girls that is :(

[123456789A]

A hole new dimension of masturbator toys... (typo pun intended by the way)

Glassed Silver:mac

The DONIX? OS, Dongles? interactive peripherals, Buildo? 3D modeler, the Fapp Store?, and Teledildoppler? matchmaking service are registered trademarks of Teledildonics, Inc., 100 Elluna Lane, Mountain View, California.

[Digit12345]

The "leave it to natural selection" argument is silly when you're living in a modern society which already rejects that notion in most respects. Modern medicine and medical practices, electronics, etc. If one day a baby can be born outside the womb with no side effects, it would just be yet another means, or "tool", for humans to use. Foregoing the advantages technology provides, especially when there are no drawbacks, just to maintain tradition is somewhat irrational and hypocritical. I don't even see it as a valid ethical issue. Who or what gets harmed other than arbitrary beliefs?

[Glassed Silver]

The "leave it to natural selection" argument is silly when you're living in a modern society which already rejects that notion in most respects. Modern medicine and medical practices, electronics, etc. If one day a baby can be born outside the womb with no side effects, it would just be yet another means, or "tool", for humans to use. Foregoing the advantages technology provides, especially when there are no drawbacks, just to maintain tradition is somewhat irrational and hypocritical. I don't even see it as a valid ethical issue. Who or what gets harmed other than arbitrary beliefs?

Well, I would say it's smart to leave it to special cases to raise a children outside a human body, because there are certain bonds created between the mother and the child during those 9 months that you can NOT recreate later on.

Glassed Silver:mac

[Digit12345]

Well, I would say it's smart to leave it to special cases to raise a children outside a human body, because there are certain bonds created between the mother and the child during those 9 months that you can NOT recreate later on.

Glassed Silver:mac

Yes, that would be a stronger argument. Although I feel the importance of those nine months is a matter of degree. Assuming the aforementioned process is perfect, there would be no ill effects on the development of the baby, or it might even be beneficial to the baby by having such a controlled environment.

As for the mother developing motherly bonds with the baby, I don't feel it's necessarily required for the baby to be inside her. Fathers aren't subject to it but we don't have an issue with that because that's the way it is. I feel like if more bonding time is important, it's also worth bringing up things like child daycare when both parents are working, or adoption where it's not even possible to have that womb bonding time. Having as much bonding time as possible would probably be the ideal situation but parents don't always have all the time in the world. It's all a balancing act in the end. Some mothers might want those additional 9 months of physical bonding time and there's nothing wrong with that of course. Others won't care for it or have other priorities.

[Colin McGregor]

Well, I would say it's smart to leave it to special cases to raise a children outside a human body, because there are certain bonds created between the mother and the child during those 9 months that you can NOT recreate later on.

Glassed Silver:mac

Maybe it can be used for a gay couple. I know probably not in the backwards USA where its still not legal in all states but there are places that actually care about its citizens like Canada that it would work great.