Sheesh...if you're going to do something like that, at least balance it out by making all of the men infertile or something.
:lightbulb You could always just counteract the process by getting some ultra-conservative group to kill all scientists.
But then you'll never get to leave the world and flee to a colony on mars where you can have giant robot wars...hmm...what a conundrum...
You cannot cuddle a test tube. So, there will still be some role for men to play1 :D
Girls are softer and more cuddly than us. Luckily, most of them haven't found this out yet, or we'd be really screwed.
Girls are softer and more cuddly than us. Luckily, most of them haven't found this out yet, or we'd be really screwed.
Counterpoint: Women may be 'softer', but men are far more cuddly.
On another note, I love the reactions to this, both here and on the article itself. The gloom and doom is vastly disproportionate to what's actually being said (or implied).
I mean, you do realize that at best this new way of "engineering" sperm would break even with sperm banks?
In the big picture, for most every great scientific achievement, there has been a byproduct or side effect either naturally occurring or manmade to balance things out as Nature has her (its) way. Not saying, "Life is a series of dynamic opposites, yin/yang, bla bla bla," but it is damn near Newtonian in that almost, "Every action has a simple and opposite reaction" so to speak.
In light of this, I would wager that engineering men, which will inevitably lead to specific desired traits, also engineered, will lead to mutations. And not the good kind either. It could be sudden retardation at an unforseen age, some crazy disease, a virus (28 Days Later anyone?), who knows.
I'd rather they spend more time on stem cells to fix the pre-existing problems we already have rather than creating new scientific and social ones. God, imagine the fallout, picketing, protests, and riots if it picks up steam...
For what it's worth, the male determines gender upon conception
.... I think you're looking for the word "too" in the thread title ...
Thanks, first I realize I am no longer needed then you point out how stupid I am. Might as well hit the bridge before I get more bad news..
Man, first girls have to go and ruin DnD:P and being a nerd in general..now this...what is next? Girls are gonna start playing video games and using HTML ...then we will have nothing left...
EDIT:I realized I had yet another grammar error in there...
(You can fix the thread title by clicking 'edit' on the first post and selecting the 'go advanced' option. Once you do that, you can edit the post where you cop to the error and in turn make KGM look to be the foolish party. Dirty? Yes. Underhanded? Yes. But we menfolk need every advantage we can get. Especially now ... :D)
I made the correction, but I leave the evidence of my obvious error. I want to hold onto my honor...something those lowly snake like girls know nothing about
I made the correction, but I leave the evidence of my obvious error. I want to hold onto my honor...something those lowly snake like girls know nothing about
If you say so. Just remember, every incidence of incompetence is just another bit of evidence against our further existence. You may well be taking the future of mankind into your noble, yet misguided, hands here. The more we screw up, the less we are needed. High road be damned, the end is nigh!
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Lab-made_sperm_could_make_men_redundant...&in_article_id=698846&in_page_id=34
Damn Brits!
I made the correction, but I leave the evidence of my obvious error. I want to hold onto my honor...something those lowly snake like girls know nothing about
...
Wow. I hope that's a joke ...
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to finish coding and then play some Fallout 3. ;)
Oh and guys, don't worry, there has also been work in creating organic wombs that can be grafted onto people. The idea is mainly so that women who for whatever reason cannot develop a child in their natural womb can use this process. However, it can conceivably work for men as well. Birth obviously would be a c-section.
I think too actually there has been some success with making artificial eggs as well. I know we are able to turn eggs into "blank eggs" with no DNA within it. So it can be implanted with DNA from parents. So once more infertile women, or gay couple, etc. could have children with their DNA.
I love science :D
This actually can be quite helpful for lots of couples. Those who are infertile, those who from injury of disease cannot have children, lesbian couples who wish to have the child be from both parties DNA.
Oh and guys, don't worry, there has also been work in creating organic wombs that can be grafted onto people. The idea is mainly so that women who for whatever reason cannot develop a child in their natural womb can use this process. However, it can conceivably work for men as well. Birth obviously would be a c-section.
I think too actually there has been some success with making artificial eggs as well. I know we are able to turn eggs into "blank eggs" with no DNA within it. So it can be implanted with DNA from parents. So once more infertile women, or gay couple, etc. could have children with their DNA.
I love science :D
Now we can get rid of all the women.
Something does not sound to my liking there.
Wimminz b lovin' da gays. Best-friendly like diamonds, PLUS we can give hugs without grabbin' the breasts....usually. ^_^
Now we can get rid of all the women.
Something does not sound to my liking there.
Hmm, a world of only men. What would that be like?
:OMG! Aaaaah! Go away science! I like the world how it is!!
I'm just glad that no matter what happens in the end, I know that MY place with women will remain completely unchanged.
Wimminz b lovin' da gays. Best-friendly like diamonds, PLUS we can give hugs without grabbin' the breasts....usually. ^_^
The novelty will soon wear off.
Something has to take the blame for everything that goes wrong, up to and including the weather.
...
Wow. I hope that's a joke ...
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to finish coding and then play some Fallout 3. ;)
...Crap!
Oh, and as admirable as adoption out of the country is, please keep in mind that there are plenty of kids within your own country that need help, too.
Umm. If you can't reproduce, you're probably not supposed to. Not to mention the fact that there are kids all over this world that are abandoned and need people to care for/about them. The more we play with this grow your own stuff, the less likely people will be willing to care for the kids we already have. Society needs to stop ignoring these forgotten bastards in some selfish hope to attempt to have what they're not meant to. We've already seen what these unnatural attempts can bring - women having literal litters of children springs immediately to mind. This stuff needs to be stopped. Right now, the human race doesn't need any help at all with reproduction. Adopt those that are parentless and care for them. After all, they're already here.
Oh, and as admirable as adoption out of the country is, please keep in mind that there are plenty of kids within your own country that need help, too.
Zombie Babies, here is your Internet Sir. I hope you accept it with great humility and grace.
Oh, and as admirable as adoption out of the country is, please keep in mind that there are plenty of kids within your own country that need help, too.
And Best Supporting poster goes to...ZB.
Gift bags @ the red carpet, after party @ Micha's.
I may only presume your platform is based on your current position IRL, no? Respect.
I may only presume your platform is based on your current position IRL, no? Respect.
Actually, not totally. It's just something I've always thought of as odd. As matter of fact, a friend of mine adopted three children from Korea. His act got me to thinking about some of this stuff. Adopting a child - any child - is a noble act and of great value to society. It just seems that the newest thing is to get a kid that's 'different'. My friend had his reasons for choosing the kids he did and I respect them. I also know that American adoptions can be kind of hard to put together. I just want to keep people thinking about the kids in their own backyard - no matter where that may be - that still need someone.
My own situation isn't altogether related to this stuff. There certainly is some influence now that I've got a little taste of living with a kid that I didn't make, though. Really, it's more a common sense thing to me. If you can't have a kid, the first choice (IMO) shouldn't be some scientific procedure - it should be looking at how much a kid would mean to you and then helping a kid that's already alive. Believe it or not, love is transferable. ;)
Umm. If you can't reproduce, you're probably not supposed to.
You know, with all the other perfectly valid reasons not to be interested in this development, this idea of how things are "supposed to" be is as silly as the idea that men would be replaced.
You know, with all the other perfectly valid reasons not to be interested in this development, this idea of how things are "supposed to" be is as silly as the idea that men would be replaced.
How so? If there is a natural reason for a person's inability to reproduce, how is it silly to say said person isn't supposed to reproduce? I can see something like an accident being less than a reason to say something like this, but a medical reason is something altogether different. Sperm meets egg and babies are formed. If your sperm or your egg is defective, no babies. And that's your lot. We need to quit fudging things to make ourselves happy and deal with what we have. There is no reason whatsoever to manufacture human beings this way. We have more than enough and many are parentless. Help them - don't make more.
How so? If there is a natural reason for a person's inability to reproduce, how is it silly to say said person isn't supposed to reproduce?
Have you looked at some of the causes of male infertility? I'd hardly say that most of those conditions are things that are supposed to happen to a man, no matter what definition of supposed you're running with.
In the end, why bog down an otherwise good argument with presumptuous claims about the things are supposed to be?
Oh, and as admirable as adoption out of the country is, please keep in mind that there are plenty of kids within your own country that need help, too.
Big reason why I think the Peace Corp and all the other 'help the third world country' groups out there are a waste of money and resources.
Have you looked at some of the causes of male infertility? I'd hardly say that most of those conditions are things that are supposed to happen to a man, no matter what definition of supposed you're running with.
In the end, why bog down an otherwise good argument with presumptuous claims about the things are supposed to be?
Umm. A ton of those were natural occurences, no? Disease, genetics, etc. So, yeah, I'm still cool with what I said.
BTW, I never said infertility was something that was supposed to happen to a man, I said that were one infertile, they were not supposed to have children. Quite a different statement.
In any event, I'm down with dropping it. If you don't like that part of my argument, I'm ok with that. Consider it noted. We can cease the bogging down at any time.
I like how you make it sound like taking care of all the bastard children of the reproductivly healthy population is the defacto job of thoes who cannot have their own. Lets the stupid people who can make more babies continue to run around making more babies without feeling bad about all the orphans in the world. I mean, obviously it isn't their fault, its the fault of all thoes non producing freaks and 'Science!'
What? All I said was instead of doing our damndest to create more kids when we're physically incapable of doing so, why not instead take care of the ones that are already here? I placed no responsibility upon anyone at all. Offering an alternative action that I personally perceive to be less selfish does not in any way mean I consider it a duty.
But now they can have kids. So why should they forgo having their own (when they can) and adopt, where others who could always have their own should be less morally inclined to adopt instead? In otherwords how is it any more selfish for an infertile person to have children than for a fertile one.
That's kind of the crux of the matter. To me, there's no need for research of this nature at all. We're so worried about what's ours (selfish) that we don't care a whit about what's not. What I'm saying is that there was already a solution for people that are unable to reproduce - kids that are already here that do not have parents for whatever reason. You want a kid, they need a parent. Presto. Problem solved - for both parties, too. Instead, we're saying screw those bastards, I want my own. They aren't mine. So, we come up with a method to solve one problem while also exacerbating another where there is already a solution that remedies both. Silly. And possibly selfish.
In any event, I'm down with dropping it.
Bah.
I like how you make it sound like taking care of all the bastard children of the reproductivly healthy population is the defacto job of thoes who cannot have their own.
/shrug
It's all about the ethics of altruism, charity, and the responsibility to help those worse-off then yourself.
And possibly selfish.
I find this curious. Why is it selfish to want for yourself what other people already have?
That's kind of the crux of the matter. To me, there's no need for research of this nature at all. We're so worried about what's ours (selfish) that we don't care a whit about what's not. What I'm saying is that there was already a solution for people that are unable to reproduce - kids that are already here that do not have parents for whatever reason. You want a kid, they need a parent. Presto. Problem solved - for both parties, too. Instead, we're saying screw those bastards, I want my own. They aren't mine. So, we come up with a method to solve one problem while also exacerbating another where there is already a solution that remedies both. Silly. And possibly selfish.
The same could be said of everyone who has a child. You want a child? Adopt. Don't get knocked up. By having your own kids, your saying screw all thoes orphans! By your logic, all reproduction is selfish (Sounds reasonable to me...). Please stop painting it as one sided. Having sex with your wife is no more or less selfish than trying to use science to have a child of your own.
I find this curious. Why is it selfish to want for yourself what other people already have?
Anytime you want anything for yourself, you are thinking selfishly. That is the definition of the word, is it not?
: being an actively replicating repetitive sequence of nucleic acid that serves no known function ; also : being genetic material solely concerned with its own replication
ShowThis more or less describes life in general, does it not?
Saul... I hate how you post...
Why?
And for the record, I am not being serious...I hope that was obvious
That's kind of the crux of the matter. To me, there's no need for research of this nature at all. We're so worried about what's ours (selfish) that we don't care a whit about what's not. What I'm saying is that there was already a solution for people that are unable to reproduce - kids that are already here that do not have parents for whatever reason. You want a kid, they need a parent. Presto. Problem solved - for both parties, too. Instead, we're saying screw those bastards, I want my own. They aren't mine. So, we come up with a method to solve one problem while also exacerbating another where there is already a solution that remedies both. Silly. And possibly selfish.
Isn't it kind of selfish for you to expect OTHER people to give up their hopes of having their own(genetically speaking) offspring in order to solve the problem of overpopulation/uncared for children? What are YOU doing to solve this problem?
Hmm, a world of only men. What would that be like?
For me, it would be slightly less depressing. No more walking around thinking, "Couldn't get her, she'd never look twice at me, she's... Oh no wait, that's a guy. She might... No, no she wouldn't. *sigh*"... *sigh*...
Isn't it kind of selfish for you to expect OTHER people to give up their hopes of having their own(genetically speaking) offspring in order to solve the problem of overpopulation/uncared for children? What are YOU doing to solve this problem?
I don't expect anything. It's just my belief that a lot of this stuff is simply unneeded. There are other options that could provide more benefit overall. I also have some opinions of my own about those that are physically incapable of having children due to natural phenomena. But I'm really, really tired today and don't care enough to humor the interwebz masses with any sort of detailed response. The only thing I feel I really, really need to clear up is this repeated mischaracterization of my position: For the last time, I do not expect anything of anyone. If that's your issue with my position, you don't actually have an issue with it at all.
What am I doing, eh? Well, I'm living within my means as responsibly as I can. Right now, I don't wish to have a child of my own. As I get older, I get closer and closer to seeing it as something I'd like. Right now, though, I'm still trying to build a stable foundation for me and mine and do not feel that bringing a child into this world would be a good idea. I'm just not currently in the proper position to do things the right way and I see no need to bring a child into a world any harsher than it need be. When these things change, so may my feelings on the matter. If I find then that I cannot have a child of my own, I hope that I can do what I feel is right and adopt or abstain. It's easy for me to say everything I have, of course, without ever facing the same problems. If I do, I sincerely hope that I can maintain my position because I do feel it is the right one.
Currently I live with my fiancee and her 10 (soon to be 11) year old son. He's there half the time thanks to shared parenting. I never once in my life thought that would be something I would be able to do. And then I met them and her step father as well. I discovered that you can care for someone as your own even if they are not and that it can be just as rewarding (and frustrating and fill you with pride and worry, etc ;)) as what I imagine having your own child would feel like. There's no biological requirement for these feelings. None. And that's a lesson I've taken to heart. I could go on and on about this - talking about the man my friend calls dad (and means it) even though he was a step father, the relationship between my other friend and his adopted children, etc, etc, but I don't think there's much point. We are, after all, discussing opinion. I feel I've defended mine well enough - and provided a fairly deep look into some of the reasons behind it. If you (general) disagree and feel the need to argue it, that's fine. I don't expect everyone to feel the same as I do, though, and that's something I think all of you need to keep in mind. Oh, and I don't expect anyone to do anything I've said, either - contrary to popular belief. ;)
Alrighty then, that's enough of that. Way more than I intended to get into. I don't talk about myself this way very often. I talk about myself all the friggin' time, of course, just not anything remotely personal or deep. So I now hate you all. :P
Recent posts imply that he is financially suporting a household containing a child that is not his own because its mother makes spectacular cakes.
This. ^^ :P
Ok, not exactly. It's explained more above - if you bothered to read that babbling wall of wasted time. ;)
There are a few sides to this type of technology, and I'll skip the semantics and cut to the chase. Why not go one step further and eliminate the need of an organic body?
They have been turning rats into these small entities so imagine what the technology could do to a fully developed human mind. Now all that would be left is to discover how to manipulate neuron longevity and organic bodies would be a thing of the ancients. So join the robot armies because flesh bags are fragile and last millennium.
This tongue-in-cheek response is provided to you by the demented mind of Klirshon. Spread the insanity!
Society needs to stop ignoring these forgotten bastards in some selfish hope to attempt to have what they're not meant to.
Pretty tough to overcome the pre-programed desire to ensure the survival of your DNA sequences. People will go bonkers to make sure their DNA doesn't die with them.
Pretty tough to overcome the pre-programed desire to ensure the survival of your DNA sequences. People will go bonkers to make sure their DNA doesn't die with them.
There's plenty that exhibit no such drive. But I'm finished with this.
Though really, the Artificial Soldier phobia is pretty nonsensical due to the length of time that it takes to raise a person into an adult. (and accelerated growth rates won't do more than cut it in half at best... but it won't do the mental development any good. The brain can only absorb information so fast, even if accelerated it doesn't help. You'd have 24 year olds with a 12 year old mind)
Do not adopt.
Do not reproduce.
CLONE yourself!
My position/opinion (plz do not crucify as it was only reserved for the worst cases by Roman law) is simply words on your monitor, not a national mandate.
To begin, ironically, w/ the Romans...adoption worked pretty damn well for them and helped build a badass empire of epic proportions. This, and having such an ecclectic gene pool (the most diverse on the planet) as a result, has helped insure a great abundance in DNA.
Show
Mo' options the mo' betta'. The cream rises to the top, gives us a better chance at mutation to combat disease, etc. This is how nature works. It is the mutt that is often longest lived whereas many purebreds suffer from genetic abnormalities as they have a very limited/constrained genetic history. More diversity means more chances at adaptation and survival. It's that simple.
So, biologically speaking, adoption is a good (imperative) idea. That alone should be enough, right? Even many non-sentient animals do it for the good of the collective. We should take a page from their book as nature wouldn't facilitate that for no reason.
Mo' options the mo' betta'. The cream rises to the top, gives us a better chance at mutation to combat disease, etc. This is how nature works. It is the mutt that is often longest lived whereas many purebreds suffer from genetic abnormalities as they have a very limited/constrained genetic history. More diversity means more chances at adaptation and survival. It's that simple.
So, biologically speaking, adoption is a good (imperative) idea. That alone should be enough, right? Even many non-sentient animals do it for the good of the collective. We should take a page from their book as nature wouldn't facilitate that for no reason.
Call it sci-fi fantasy if you want, but it will only be a matter of time before "they" start producing manufactured soldiers.
Call me crazy if you want, but truth is stranger than fiction...
I can't remember where I read it, but apparently they already have "super soldier" suits. Suits that allow you to jump higher, run faster, throw a harder punch and take multiple bullets without feeling any pain at all. In about 5 years, those suits may very well have the ability to accelerate the healing process in humans.
CLONE yourself!
Then you could make out with yourself. That'd be pretty hot, I guess. >.>...
Call it sci-fi fantasy if you want, but it will only be a matter of time before "they" start producing manufactured soldiers.
Call me crazy if you want, but truth is stranger than fiction...
While I don't see us making manufactured soldiers, as time progresses and the means of cloning and developing biological systems improve I could see western nations adopting to having soldiers have their DNA stored in case of emergency need. You get a limb blown off we got a cold-storage identical DNA arm for you. Need a new lung, got one right here. The process could be either through slab-meat style, or brain-dead human cloning.
A lot of lives could be saved, or just improved greatly with such technology. Eventually overtime too I could see it going into the private then public domain too.
Call it sci-fi fantasy if you want, but it will only be a matter of time before "they" start producing manufactured soldiers.
Warforged? :D Hey, they have souls, too!
Hmm, some food for thought and plenty of appetizers too. How hungry are you?
A truly epic buffet table, right there.
Step 1) Child Wellfare: Gone. No more food stamps for parents who cannot feed their kids, no more orphanages. You cant take care of your kids? Fine, they go to boot camp for training and education. Third time? Fine, your going too, to serve as cheap ground infantry.
Step 2) Profit.
Then you could make out with yourself. That'd be pretty hot, I guess. >.>...
Reverse gender cloning?
Reverse gender cloning?
Why's it gotta be like that? I know I'm an awesome enough person that it doesn't matter at all what kind of gear I'm sportin' if it comes down to some me on me action. I'm down. It's that simple, man. And I know what I'm doin', too. The people watchin' would be in for one hell of a treat. Trust me on that one.
Make two reverse gender clones of yourself and watch them make out?
I'd have to join in. I'd make two sexy ladies. ;)
Hmm, some food for thought and plenty of appetizers too. How hungry are you?
Pretty long, but I enjoyed reading it.
What? No love for my plan to conscript orphans from unfit parents? Blah blah blah, 'children should be nutured and protected, not exploited in your fascist war machines!'. Well screw all you damn pansy ass hippies!
There was also no one objecting.
Warforged? :D Hey, they have souls, too!
Too true. I'm surprised w/ the related discussions in light of soldiering and so forth, this never meandered into terminator territory. I mean, they keep pushing this "trying to un-man the battlefield" dynamic w/ a glut of UAVs, more satellite everything, and pushing the tech curve in no uncertain terms.
A truly epic buffet table, right there.
MusicOfCreation: Pretty long, but I enjoyed reading it.
Flattered to be sure, but the food for thought bit was in reference to the preceeding additions & insights, not an ironic reference to the mammoth wall of text I posted. I should've considered that more carefully, oh well.
Gotta watch Idiocracy again...
Well screw all you damn pansy ass hippies!
This would be better with a little punctuation. It would help clarify your insult properly, at least. Perhaps you might consider one of the following:
- pansy-ass hippies: Hippies whose posteriors (or possibly mules) are akin to pansies.
- pansy ass-hippies: Hippies of the butt who also happen to be pansies.
- pansy, ass, hippies: Perhaps a shopping list? (What are you cooking?)
Or, in order to avoid punctuation,you could always do what English-speakers have been doing for a long time; you could bastardize your own words. Consider, perhaps, "panassippies" (pronounced pan-ass-ih-pees).
We don't need to clone soldiers, replace parts, or issue birthing liscences. I have a plan that will solve all thoes problems!
Step 1) Child Wellfare: Gone. No more food stamps for parents who cannot feed their kids, no more orphanages. You cant take care of your kids? Fine, they go to boot camp for training and education. Third time? Fine, your going too, to serve as cheap ground infantry.
Step 2) Profit.
Not a bad idea.
The look on your face when a toddler rips out your heart and shows it to you? Priceless.
I still think we need to harvest their brain neurons, and train those cells to learn how to operate machinery through electrical circuitry. If they show signs of treasonous behavior, just pop out the brain and put in another to display their loyalty to their military.
This cruise missle was brought to you by Jacob. Isn't he a cute little rascal everyone?
But now they can have kids. So why should they forgo having their own (when they can) and adopt, where others who could always have their own should be less morally inclined to adopt instead? In otherwords how is it any more selfish for an infertile person to have children than for a fertile one.
That's kind of the crux of the matter. To me, there's no need for research of this nature at all. We're so worried about what's ours (selfish) that we don't care a whit about what's not. What I'm saying is that there was already a solution for people that are unable to reproduce - kids that are already here that do not have parents for whatever reason. You want a kid, they need a parent. Presto. Problem solved - for both parties, too. Instead, we're saying screw those bastards, I want my own. They aren't mine. So, we come up with a method to solve one problem while also exacerbating another where there is already a solution that remedies both. Silly. And possibly selfish.
In any event, I'm down with dropping it.
Bah.
I like how you make it sound like taking care of all the bastard children of the reproductivly healthy population is the defacto job of thoes who cannot have their own.
/shrug
It's all about the ethics of altruism, charity, and the responsibility to help those worse-off then yourself.
And possibly selfish.
I find this curious. Why is it selfish to want for yourself what other people already have?
That's kind of the crux of the matter. To me, there's no need for research of this nature at all. We're so worried about what's ours (selfish) that we don't care a whit about what's not. What I'm saying is that there was already a solution for people that are unable to reproduce - kids that are already here that do not have parents for whatever reason. You want a kid, they need a parent. Presto. Problem solved - for both parties, too. Instead, we're saying screw those bastards, I want my own. They aren't mine. So, we come up with a method to solve one problem while also exacerbating another where there is already a solution that remedies both. Silly. And possibly selfish.
The same could be said of everyone who has a child. You want a child? Adopt. Don't get knocked up. By having your own kids, your saying screw all thoes orphans! By your logic, all reproduction is selfish (Sounds reasonable to me...). Please stop painting it as one sided. Having sex with your wife is no more or less selfish than trying to use science to have a child of your own.
I find this curious. Why is it selfish to want for yourself what other people already have?
Anytime you want anything for yourself, you are thinking selfishly. That is the definition of the word, is it not?
: being an actively replicating repetitive sequence of nucleic acid that serves no known function ; also : being genetic material solely concerned with its own replication
ShowThis more or less describes life in general, does it not?
Saul... I hate how you post...
Why?
And for the record, I am not being serious...I hope that was obvious
That's kind of the crux of the matter. To me, there's no need for research of this nature at all. We're so worried about what's ours (selfish) that we don't care a whit about what's not. What I'm saying is that there was already a solution for people that are unable to reproduce - kids that are already here that do not have parents for whatever reason. You want a kid, they need a parent. Presto. Problem solved - for both parties, too. Instead, we're saying screw those bastards, I want my own. They aren't mine. So, we come up with a method to solve one problem while also exacerbating another where there is already a solution that remedies both. Silly. And possibly selfish.
Isn't it kind of selfish for you to expect OTHER people to give up their hopes of having their own(genetically speaking) offspring in order to solve the problem of overpopulation/uncared for children? What are YOU doing to solve this problem?
Hmm, a world of only men. What would that be like?
For me, it would be slightly less depressing. No more walking around thinking, "Couldn't get her, she'd never look twice at me, she's... Oh no wait, that's a guy. She might... No, no she wouldn't. *sigh*"... *sigh*...
Isn't it kind of selfish for you to expect OTHER people to give up their hopes of having their own(genetically speaking) offspring in order to solve the problem of overpopulation/uncared for children? What are YOU doing to solve this problem?
I don't expect anything. It's just my belief that a lot of this stuff is simply unneeded. There are other options that could provide more benefit overall. I also have some opinions of my own about those that are physically incapable of having children due to natural phenomena. But I'm really, really tired today and don't care enough to humor the interwebz masses with any sort of detailed response. The only thing I feel I really, really need to clear up is this repeated mischaracterization of my position: For the last time, I do not expect anything of anyone. If that's your issue with my position, you don't actually have an issue with it at all.
What am I doing, eh? Well, I'm living within my means as responsibly as I can. Right now, I don't wish to have a child of my own. As I get older, I get closer and closer to seeing it as something I'd like. Right now, though, I'm still trying to build a stable foundation for me and mine and do not feel that bringing a child into this world would be a good idea. I'm just not currently in the proper position to do things the right way and I see no need to bring a child into a world any harsher than it need be. When these things change, so may my feelings on the matter. If I find then that I cannot have a child of my own, I hope that I can do what I feel is right and adopt or abstain. It's easy for me to say everything I have, of course, without ever facing the same problems. If I do, I sincerely hope that I can maintain my position because I do feel it is the right one.
Currently I live with my fiancee and her 10 (soon to be 11) year old son. He's there half the time thanks to shared parenting. I never once in my life thought that would be something I would be able to do. And then I met them and her step father as well. I discovered that you can care for someone as your own even if they are not and that it can be just as rewarding (and frustrating and fill you with pride and worry, etc ;)) as what I imagine having your own child would feel like. There's no biological requirement for these feelings. None. And that's a lesson I've taken to heart. I could go on and on about this - talking about the man my friend calls dad (and means it) even though he was a step father, the relationship between my other friend and his adopted children, etc, etc, but I don't think there's much point. We are, after all, discussing opinion. I feel I've defended mine well enough - and provided a fairly deep look into some of the reasons behind it. If you (general) disagree and feel the need to argue it, that's fine. I don't expect everyone to feel the same as I do, though, and that's something I think all of you need to keep in mind. Oh, and I don't expect anyone to do anything I've said, either - contrary to popular belief. ;)
Alrighty then, that's enough of that. Way more than I intended to get into. I don't talk about myself this way very often. I talk about myself all the friggin' time, of course, just not anything remotely personal or deep. So I now hate you all. :P
Recent posts imply that he is financially suporting a household containing a child that is not his own because its mother makes spectacular cakes.
This. ^^ :P
Ok, not exactly. It's explained more above - if you bothered to read that babbling wall of wasted time. ;)
There are a few sides to this type of technology, and I'll skip the semantics and cut to the chase. Why not go one step further and eliminate the need of an organic body?
They have been turning rats into these small entities so imagine what the technology could do to a fully developed human mind. Now all that would be left is to discover how to manipulate neuron longevity and organic bodies would be a thing of the ancients. So join the robot armies because flesh bags are fragile and last millennium.
This tongue-in-cheek response is provided to you by the demented mind of Klirshon. Spread the insanity!
Society needs to stop ignoring these forgotten bastards in some selfish hope to attempt to have what they're not meant to.
Pretty tough to overcome the pre-programed desire to ensure the survival of your DNA sequences. People will go bonkers to make sure their DNA doesn't die with them.
Pretty tough to overcome the pre-programed desire to ensure the survival of your DNA sequences. People will go bonkers to make sure their DNA doesn't die with them.
There's plenty that exhibit no such drive. But I'm finished with this.
Though really, the Artificial Soldier phobia is pretty nonsensical due to the length of time that it takes to raise a person into an adult. (and accelerated growth rates won't do more than cut it in half at best... but it won't do the mental development any good. The brain can only absorb information so fast, even if accelerated it doesn't help. You'd have 24 year olds with a 12 year old mind)
Do not adopt.
Do not reproduce.
CLONE yourself!
My position/opinion (plz do not crucify as it was only reserved for the worst cases by Roman law) is simply words on your monitor, not a national mandate.
To begin, ironically, w/ the Romans...adoption worked pretty damn well for them and helped build a badass empire of epic proportions. This, and having such an ecclectic gene pool (the most diverse on the planet) as a result, has helped insure a great abundance in DNA.
Show
Mo' options the mo' betta'. The cream rises to the top, gives us a better chance at mutation to combat disease, etc. This is how nature works. It is the mutt that is often longest lived whereas many purebreds suffer from genetic abnormalities as they have a very limited/constrained genetic history. More diversity means more chances at adaptation and survival. It's that simple.
So, biologically speaking, adoption is a good (imperative) idea. That alone should be enough, right? Even many non-sentient animals do it for the good of the collective. We should take a page from their book as nature wouldn't facilitate that for no reason.
Mo' options the mo' betta'. The cream rises to the top, gives us a better chance at mutation to combat disease, etc. This is how nature works. It is the mutt that is often longest lived whereas many purebreds suffer from genetic abnormalities as they have a very limited/constrained genetic history. More diversity means more chances at adaptation and survival. It's that simple.
So, biologically speaking, adoption is a good (imperative) idea. That alone should be enough, right? Even many non-sentient animals do it for the good of the collective. We should take a page from their book as nature wouldn't facilitate that for no reason.
Call it sci-fi fantasy if you want, but it will only be a matter of time before "they" start producing manufactured soldiers.
Call me crazy if you want, but truth is stranger than fiction...
I can't remember where I read it, but apparently they already have "super soldier" suits. Suits that allow you to jump higher, run faster, throw a harder punch and take multiple bullets without feeling any pain at all. In about 5 years, those suits may very well have the ability to accelerate the healing process in humans.
CLONE yourself!
Then you could make out with yourself. That'd be pretty hot, I guess. >.>...
Call it sci-fi fantasy if you want, but it will only be a matter of time before "they" start producing manufactured soldiers.
Call me crazy if you want, but truth is stranger than fiction...
While I don't see us making manufactured soldiers, as time progresses and the means of cloning and developing biological systems improve I could see western nations adopting to having soldiers have their DNA stored in case of emergency need. You get a limb blown off we got a cold-storage identical DNA arm for you. Need a new lung, got one right here. The process could be either through slab-meat style, or brain-dead human cloning.
A lot of lives could be saved, or just improved greatly with such technology. Eventually overtime too I could see it going into the private then public domain too.
Call it sci-fi fantasy if you want, but it will only be a matter of time before "they" start producing manufactured soldiers.
Warforged? :D Hey, they have souls, too!
Hmm, some food for thought and plenty of appetizers too. How hungry are you?
A truly epic buffet table, right there.
Step 1) Child Wellfare: Gone. No more food stamps for parents who cannot feed their kids, no more orphanages. You cant take care of your kids? Fine, they go to boot camp for training and education. Third time? Fine, your going too, to serve as cheap ground infantry.
Step 2) Profit.
Then you could make out with yourself. That'd be pretty hot, I guess. >.>...
Reverse gender cloning?
Reverse gender cloning?
Why's it gotta be like that? I know I'm an awesome enough person that it doesn't matter at all what kind of gear I'm sportin' if it comes down to some me on me action. I'm down. It's that simple, man. And I know what I'm doin', too. The people watchin' would be in for one hell of a treat. Trust me on that one.
Make two reverse gender clones of yourself and watch them make out?
I'd have to join in. I'd make two sexy ladies. ;)
Hmm, some food for thought and plenty of appetizers too. How hungry are you?
Pretty long, but I enjoyed reading it.
What? No love for my plan to conscript orphans from unfit parents? Blah blah blah, 'children should be nutured and protected, not exploited in your fascist war machines!'. Well screw all you damn pansy ass hippies!
There was also no one objecting.
Warforged? :D Hey, they have souls, too!
Too true. I'm surprised w/ the related discussions in light of soldiering and so forth, this never meandered into terminator territory. I mean, they keep pushing this "trying to un-man the battlefield" dynamic w/ a glut of UAVs, more satellite everything, and pushing the tech curve in no uncertain terms.
A truly epic buffet table, right there.
MusicOfCreation: Pretty long, but I enjoyed reading it.
Flattered to be sure, but the food for thought bit was in reference to the preceeding additions & insights, not an ironic reference to the mammoth wall of text I posted. I should've considered that more carefully, oh well.
Gotta watch Idiocracy again...
Well screw all you damn pansy ass hippies!
This would be better with a little punctuation. It would help clarify your insult properly, at least. Perhaps you might consider one of the following:
- pansy-ass hippies: Hippies whose posteriors (or possibly mules) are akin to pansies.
- pansy ass-hippies: Hippies of the butt who also happen to be pansies.
- pansy, ass, hippies: Perhaps a shopping list? (What are you cooking?)
Or, in order to avoid punctuation,you could always do what English-speakers have been doing for a long time; you could bastardize your own words. Consider, perhaps, "panassippies" (pronounced pan-ass-ih-pees).
We don't need to clone soldiers, replace parts, or issue birthing liscences. I have a plan that will solve all thoes problems!
Step 1) Child Wellfare: Gone. No more food stamps for parents who cannot feed their kids, no more orphanages. You cant take care of your kids? Fine, they go to boot camp for training and education. Third time? Fine, your going too, to serve as cheap ground infantry.
Step 2) Profit.
Not a bad idea.
The look on your face when a toddler rips out your heart and shows it to you? Priceless.
I still think we need to harvest their brain neurons, and train those cells to learn how to operate machinery through electrical circuitry. If they show signs of treasonous behavior, just pop out the brain and put in another to display their loyalty to their military.
This cruise missle was brought to you by Jacob. Isn't he a cute little rascal everyone?