There is only one fertile woman left on the planet; she is our only hope of carrying on the species, but she does not want to do so. Her mind can't be changed. Is it okay to impregnate her against her will?
icymore
2009/08/24 03:13:23
|
|
|||||
|
7 votes
|
|
9% | ||
|
1 vote
|
|
1% | ||
|
54 votes
|
|
69% | ||
|
12 votes
|
|
15% | ||
|
4 votes
|
|
5% | ||
Some people have brought up the issue of a limited gene pool...I really didn't think of that when I posted the question. before commenting, please try to overlook that issue and stick to what the question is really about.
Top Opinion
-
macnamera killjoy 2009/08/24 03:30:51
i would say the same of the situations were reversed... an yes even if that one last fertile male was me. ok, especially if it were me...
2. Artificial insemination against a woman when she doesn't want it is WRONG and should never be done.
Now, the real issue.
Has it ever occurred to you that if humans were extinct, it would be the best thing for the planet and all other life forms on it? If we were gone, they would thrive. While we're here, we destroy everything in our path.
Has it also occurred to you that unless you keep her pregnant all the time, you can only create so many new people, in which case if they bred with each other, THAT is called INCEST. Which will keep the human race alive, but will make us even more dumb than we already are, if that's even possible.
And, if we are to the point where only one woman is left who is fertile, could it be because again, we have destroyed everything on the planet, even ourselves, to the point where nature is basically disallowing us to further breed anymore? When we lose the ability to procreate our own species willfully, it's probably just time to turn the lights out.
Either way, I think that if there is only one woman who can make the decision, she is an important woman. If you believe in God, in your twisted logic, would it not make sense that he gave her this decision? Maybe whether God exists or n...
2. Artificial insemination against a woman when she doesn't want it is WRONG and should never be done.
Now, the real issue.
Has it ever occurred to you that if humans were extinct, it would be the best thing for the planet and all other life forms on it? If we were gone, they would thrive. While we're here, we destroy everything in our path.
Has it also occurred to you that unless you keep her pregnant all the time, you can only create so many new people, in which case if they bred with each other, THAT is called INCEST. Which will keep the human race alive, but will make us even more dumb than we already are, if that's even possible.
And, if we are to the point where only one woman is left who is fertile, could it be because again, we have destroyed everything on the planet, even ourselves, to the point where nature is basically disallowing us to further breed anymore? When we lose the ability to procreate our own species willfully, it's probably just time to turn the lights out.
Either way, I think that if there is only one woman who can make the decision, she is an important woman. If you believe in God, in your twisted logic, would it not make sense that he gave her this decision? Maybe whether God exists or not, the human race dying out would be the best thing for everybody. And that is a moral decision in itself, and if she decided that was the conclusion, I would die happy.
in fact, the sooner we're gone the better chance mother earth will have to heal herself . . . and she has a LOT of work to do because of us.
And if they were to really get her pregnant, if they seriously needed to, just take her embryo and get sperm and do some damn cloning. Or just take some sperm and inject it into her somehow (like when she's sleeping). But rape is not okay.... and if putting sperm into her without her noticing is considered rape... then no it's not okay.