How will artificial womb technology affect the abortion debate?

[Desiree]

An artificial womb would be device that can turn an embryo into a human baby without the use of a human female. If a female falls pregnant, she can elect to go through with the pregnancy or have the embryo extracted from her uterus and placed in an artificial womb. A third option is the option that females have now and that is to simply destroy the embryo. But if we had the technology to give the embryo life without forcing a female to go through pregnancy and child birth, what would this make a decision to destroy embryo?

 

[Super Atheist]

I'm not letting any of my DNA out into the world. And certainly not going to allow someone else to raise it.

 

[Samian's Eleventh Account]

Let's see these "artificial wombs" around everywhere, then we'll talk.
Until then, I am resolutely pro-choice

 

[The Incorrect Atheist]

More reasons that "absolute" truths are a bad idea. You can't have absolutes when your society changes so frequently.

 

[Josh A]

i think that would be a great idea then we dont have to kill the baby you can still have it live and it would create jobs for people to watch over all these children

 

[JaqMar House]

I don't think the Creator would appreciate this...

 

[AdoreHim]

I honestly don't think that it would change much about the abortion issue. Because it is far more than not just wanting to be pregnant- it is about not wanting to take responsibility for the child. There may be a few that would opt to have the embryo extracted and placed in an artificial womb, but not 4,000 a day. I counseled women for over 10 years, and the main reason was not that they did not want to go through with the pregnancy. The main reason the women were choosing abortion was because they did not want to parent. What about the best option ever - adoption? does any one think of that these days?

 

[Galaxie Girl]

It would probably make it even more common for young women to be promiscuous and careless, and not be held responsible for their decisions.

 

[imported_Blue Foots™]

They'll probably claim that it's a "life" and so you can't kill it.
As usual.

 

[Meg M]

Awesome question! I often think the "woman's body" argument is just a red herring to distract us from the real issue -- killing human beings. Why do I think this? Because "pro-choice" people don't have any objections to experimenting on and/or destroying human embryos who AREN'T in anyone else's body.

This would make it harder for "pro-choice" people to hide behind "it's a woman's body" and they'd have to more directly argue for the "right" to kill early stage human beings.