67 year old Gives birth

By BlinX
in Poll Station

 Share

Right or wrong, let the masses decide!  

156 members have voted

  1. 1. Right or wrong, let the masses decide!

    • Right?
      24
    • Wrong?
      132

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

craybox

Posted
Posted

Like most of the opinions here i feel that it is a very selfish circumstance. You have to think about the child for god sake.

and to think i thought i was nearly too old at 28 to have kids. My boy won't be able to buy me a pint till i'm 46 :o my lil angel till when i'm 48 ( ok that was a selfish thought :) )

Grand Master

leesmithg

Posted
Posted
:yes:?:yes::?:yes:s:

585305148[/snapback]

Mmm what you call God did not, medical science did you knob!

Women generally stop being fertile around 40, it's called the end of menopause.

I wonder if mr or mrs religion likes the fact she did not produce the egg herself.

Grand Master

shakey

Posted
Posted

first off, who cares what christians say, they are hypocrites.

2nd, thats way to old to have a baby. that mom wont beable to handle the constant getting up at night to help the baby, i mean hell, i bet in 3 years times the mom will need a nurse and a baby sitter....

3rd, (for yall religous types) if "god" as u say ment this to happen, then didnt he also mean for her not to have a baby???

alright, those are my views. i have no religion, i still believe in god, but i do it my way. i dont need to listen to anyone on how to live my life....

Grand Master

ramesees

Posted
Posted

Yeah this is science gone wrong

Just because science can carry out certain procedures, doesn't necessarily mean it should. Think of the greater good in this case. Which is better, that a woman unable to have kids her entire life gives birth at 67, or that kid is born, and will have to possibly bury his mother in his teens and suffer goodness knows what upbringing all because with regards to all the usual kid stuff (feeding, being taught how to read and write, sports etc..) and the rest.

The needs of the child needed to be taken into account in this case, and not those of the selfish mother who wanted kids and could using modern technology

Grand Master

FiB3R

Posted
Posted (edited)
Bloody selfish cow!

585303866[/snapback]

Selfish, old, rediculous

She probs dont have long to live, unfair for children

Just not right :pinch:

585303887[/snapback]

Wrong, selfish ****ing old slag. I feel sorry for the surviving girl, one of them died at birth:((

585304022[/snapback]

It's been proven that premature baby's have shorter lives and suffer from more illnesses.

This is child abuse.

Edited by The Cub
Enthusiast

VR44

Posted
Posted

i dont think the question is so much is it right or wrong so much is it moral,

and i would have to say not, its unfair on the children like most of you said and does go against nature, we've evolved this way for a reason if you screw around with it too much things are going to go wrong

Grand Master

leesmithg

Posted
Posted
Yeah this is science gone wrong

Just because science can carry out certain procedures, doesn't necessarily mean it should. Think of the greater good in this case. Which is better, that a woman unable to have kids her entire life gives birth at 67,

585305441[/snapback]

See she could have children, she was too bloody career minded to bother to be a mother in the correct span of her younger life.

Grand Master

AshMan

Posted
Posted
maybe to you. But there are others who feel otherwise. Maybe it was her own persoanl sign from the big man. I dont think it's that weird i mean come on, old people pop viagra these days and get crazy. This truly could giver her a new lease on life. And the age gap isnt so bad. I'm actually rasied by my grandparetns and i treat them like my mother and father.

585304101[/snapback]

If you were raised by your great-great grandparents, you'd have a different opinion. It's not about what is best for the woman; news flash, only bad parents bring children in to the world for their own benefit. A child is an independent life and should only be brought in the this world for it's own benefit. Your argument is like two people in a bad marriage that have a kid to save their marriage!

OMG! I've just had a thought!

The old granny might share the same diaper brand with her kid!

Veteran

DannyGlass

Posted
Posted

I think its wrong because

(1) By the time the child is ten years of age his mother may have passed on.

(2) The mum might not handle looking after the child properly.

There are many other reasons why i think it is wrong but i will not go into detail.

-DannyGlass

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By sphbecker · Posted

      If you don't care to read what I said, then you prove my point. Maybe written media is beyond your attention span. Titles are not summaries my friend.
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By +Nik Louch · Posted

      Nobody asked... in fact, I said "I don't care about political leanings"  
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By Elliot B. · Posted

      TLDR. Here is a far better title (just a basic example): Windows 11 26H2 to allow disabling Web search results
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By Dan~ · Posted

      Restore will get my vote, only if to see if things are any different, doubt it though but Labour and Conservatives too out of touch and same thing over and over and over…, Lib Dem who?
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By sphbecker · Posted

      There is nothing wrong with this title. You have completely missed the plot when it comes to "clickbait." The issue was never that a title tries to entice you to click, that is how titles have worked for over 100 years. The issue is when the title subverts expectations, getting you to click expecting something that isn't there. The classic clickbait example is "Boyfriend caught cheating, what happens next will shock you," then what happened next is the girlfriend was upset...which is probably the least shocking outcome imaginable. If sounds like what you want is for the titles to be a collection of 10-word summaries that you can skim, get the just of the story, and only click if you want more details. That is not, never has been, and never will be what titles are. You can go all the way back to print newspapers during the great depression and see the same thing. The newspaper was locked in a vending machine, all you can see is the headline, you choose to put in 5¢ to buy the paper and read the rest if you want. Those headlines were written in a way to sell the paper, not just to provide a summery. Here are two actual headlines from that time, "Wall Street Lays an Egg," or "Stocks Hit Bottom?" Maybe you'd say something like "it was wrong then and it's still wrong now." Okay, fine opinion to have, but it isn't like Neowin is doing something unjurnalistic, they are just following the age-old standards for written media.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      525
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      199
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!