The holy grail of the abortion debate. What happens when cheap, safe, and effective Artificial womb becomes a reality? Does the bodily autonomy argument become null or would there be talks about the "right" not to become a parent. Of course, unless human fetus personhood is accepted, there will still be people that argue that terminating it is a right.
People will finally realise that human life has never been valued.
>>16805127They already have that.
>>16805127>would there be talks about the "right" not to become a parent.They already do that.
> artificial wombsImagine the power that would give us. We could create Neanderthal, ancient Greeks, omni-potent uebermenschen, people capable of breathing on Mars and there would be no one and nothing to stop us. We would become lords of the universe.
>>16805127There are different combinations of stances towards abortion, so artificial wombs wouldn't create one unanimous consensus stance. For instance, I think the bodily autonomy argument is bad but I don't think the fetus should be treated as a person until it achieves a sufficient level of neurological development. Someone else might think that the fetus should be treated as a person from conception but abortion should be a right because of the bodily autonomy argument. The latter person would say that in the absence of an artificial womb, even late term abortions are justified, but with artificial wombs, killing even a week old fetus is murder. I on the other hand think that abortions beyond the second trimester are not justified unless the mother is in serious danger, but I think killing a week old fetus isn't murder even if it's inside an artificial womb.
>>16805144By the masses, yes. Intelligent people have always valued it and will continue to do so.>>16805157A child raised by a machine will turn out to be a machine and nothing more. In fact, we already have many such machines walking around society, since most of society is already obsessed with performance and treats others like a statistic.
>>16805127I'd rather have artificial boobs.
>>16805127Body autonomy was always a meme, an abortion where the baby survives (see Melissa Ohden or Gianna Jensen) are called "failed" even though muh body autonomy was upheld.
>>16805175>Should be treated as a person until it achieves a sufficient level of neurological development.Why? A person's human right has nothing to do with their neurological development. All are treated equal under the law. Human fetus, are by definition, human and thus have human rights. Fetuses being human isn't even a debate in the scientific community. The only somewhat acceptable argument to terminate fetuses is the bodily autonomy argument but if Artificial Wombs become a reality, that goes out of the window.
>>16805177>By the masses, yes. Intelligent people have always valued it and will continue to do so.No, the most intelligent realise it's all a joke. Only retards and animals think reproduction is an accomplishment, actually just retards even animals know the reality of life.
>>16805196>Only retards and animals think reproduction is an accomplishmentWho said anything about this? This is an entirely different sentiment from seeing value and beauty in life and the Earth.
>>16805199That's a very naïve feminine perspective.
>>16805210It's an intellectual perspective. Pain, suffering, and tragedy are part of the grand aesthetic of life that only the most courageous and multifaceted of souls can endure without feeling repulsion.
>>16805222Sounds Sadomasochistic. Intelligent people usually have less children for a reason.
>>16805242>Intelligent people usually have less children for a reason.Yes, because higher intelligence is concerned with quality and not quantity.
>>16805247Then why do the truly enlightened like Jesus have no children?
>>16805253He had more important things to do.
>>16805260What about the monks and yogis who sit around doing nothing?
>>16805192It doesn't make sense to me for personhood to be a matter of phylogeny. A capacity for having subjective experiences seems like a better metric because outside of the abortion debate, pretty much every moral dilemma deals with things like judgements, promises, pain, ownership etc. An object (i.e. a being without the capacity for having subjective experiences) cannot engage in those sorts of things.
>>16805261Religious fervor isn't necessarily a mark of intelligence.
>>16805270Enlightenment is, all the great masters of the 20th century never had children.
If Artificial Womb become a thing and they're safe and cheap and women still want to kill their own unborn children, it will finally reveal to men the true nature of women.
>>16805277Enlightenment doesn't mean the same thing to everyone.
>>16805283Only to those who have no experience of it.
>>16805277Maybe they weren't that smart after all.
>>16805180>>16805281What about trans?
>>16805287>muh dik
>>16805281The real problem it will reveal is simps.Everyone already knows that women are subhuman, because only men are human.>>16805293
>>16805286Your tyrannical nonsense is unintelligent.
>>16805293>Missing the point and going off tangent.
>>16805297>>16805302Coping & Seething
>>16805304The "enlightened" monk doesn't see value and beauty in life and the Earth until it has been reduced to its bare essentials. This isn't the mark of an intellectual position.
>>16805308How would you know? What he does is remove the illusions that you chase after.
>>16805310>How would you know?Because the monk doesn't live in the world.
>>16805281It'll shift from body rights to property rights because feminism will always try to make women not responsible for anything.
>>16805312So you need illusions to struggle through life but he is content and blissful without.
>>16805318The intellectual transcends the distinction between reality and illusion and is courageous enough to continue contending with pain and find aesthetic value in it.
>>16805331Sounds like denial and cope. I think your intelligence is an illusion.
>>16805347>I think your intelligence is an illusion.All lower intelligence thinks this of higher intelligence.
>>16805367So you realise that "finding" (creating) meaning is simply cope?
>>16805387A cope is invented to prevent suffering.
>>16805415So you are not "courageous enough to continue contending with pain" ?
>>16805430I'm saying that I'm not coping at all, by definition. You employ concepts incorrectly.
>>16805434Trying to find meaning where it doesn't exist is a cope, you are creating copes because you can't accept reality as it is.
>>16805447"Finding" meaning means creating where there previously wasn't any, and this would only be a cope if the intention was to prevent pain, which is not the case for the intellectual.
>>16805453Putting makeup on a pig is cope, especially if this pig is your wife. Trying to "find aesthetic value" is cope.
>>16805460You don't understand the words you use.
>>16805467You are coping about being a coper, just cope with it.
>>16805474You fear the intellect.
>>16805480I am the intellect, destroying illusions and cope.
>>16805481In exchange for what, exactly? I'm the one who supports this existence, not you.
>>16805487Truth doesn't work for reward, lies do.
>>16805501Your truth is the truth of a coward.
>>16805506Truth is truth, there is no my truth or your truth.
>>16805511Your body is omniscient and omnipresent, is it?
>>16805515Do you believe yourself to be the body?
>>16805524It's the stronger position to take.
>>16805532So you don't even know what you are.
>>16805127It's wrong because if this became widespread it would be confirmed we're treating Brave New World like a bucket list instead of a warning. Seriously why does it seem that satire and cautious tales are slowly becoming more like prophecy?
>>16805730That doesn't explain why it's wrong, the only problem in BNW was the christcuck.
>>16805127The only reason the body autonomy argument lands so well in mainstream is because public discourse is primarily driven by women currently and abortion is heavily weighted in the woman's rights, and if we're being honest leans against men's rights. Why would artificial wombs have anything to do with women at all? There are some arguments being made about sexbots dehumanizing women but they don't have much ground to stand on when looking back on typical arguments of bodily autonomy, kind of shot themselves in the foot with that and eithet have to admit it's all bullshit or give in to men having equal autonomy which would allow men all the artificial options they choose to employ. The artificial womb situation would likely fall in the same camp. In the long run, given a free market, artificial wombs and sexbots and the like will not be impeded. The only thing that would is some sort of sweeping regulations and wars have been started over far less.
>>16805127If artificial wombs become a thing, then the state would no longer have any reason to care about regulating the reproductive activity of the general populace, because humans could just be manufactured as needed to serve the interests of the state.Abortion would be relegated to the status of a religious joke issue, like liquor stores being closed on Sunday in some states, but would likely be completely unregulated in most places and not seen as a subject worthy of debate.
>>16805537Knowledge is expression.
>>16805185I don't see your point, they're called failed abortions because they didn't succeed in it's goal, preventing the mother from delivering a surviving baby. >>16805315I see where you're coming from, but I wouldn't be so pessimistic. Foids historically have relied on technologies, invented and made by men, such as household appliances, birth control and abortion. To be able to advance their cause, artificial wombs may be the one thing that causes them to lose leverage. A shift in the right direction, for men.
