Dreamosophy > Comments on Are Alternative Methods of Conception Immoral?

Go to DreamosophyAdd a commentGo to Are Alternative Methods of Conception Immoral?

Are alternative methods of conception Imoral

Sheilah - Sorry about the mistake in authorship.  I was going to reply in the comments section , but it got too lengthy.


posted by buckboyy on October 1, 2007 at 10:08 AM | link to this | reply

I think that it was maybe me that wrote that post.

Well, anyway I would have apreciated your opinion on my post (I mean, in the comments section).

posted by Sheilah on September 28, 2007 at 6:50 PM | link to this | reply

This is a very interesting topic.
Sometimes I wonder if modern life hasn't become so complicated that we can no longer see the irony--people spending billions aborting pregnancies, people spending billions artificially conceiving.  Just pointing out the irony.

posted by FineYoungSinger on September 21, 2007 at 12:06 PM | link to this | reply

The biological inability to have a child isn't moral or immoral, it is a
biological inability to either produce sperm, conceive, or gestate a child.  There is no judgment here; it just is.  Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to believe that alternative methods of conception would be immoral -- or moral either.  The ridiculousness of this argument can be underscored by looking at it thusly:  if a husband can produce sperm, but his wife cannot conceive, and it is immoral for them to choose an alternative, then it would stand to reason that it would be immoral for her to not allow the man to spread his seed elsewhere.  It would also be immoral for the man not to go forth a multiply.  But, then, you run into adultery... A conundrum?  No, just another asinine belief that would drag us back into the Dark Ages based on superstitious nonsense...

posted by saul_relative on September 20, 2007 at 9:44 PM | link to this | reply

Referrals - About Us - Press - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Conduct Policy
Copyright © 2018 Shaycom Corporation. All rights reserved.