It's been awhile, and though I have thoughts and opinions that amuse me every single day - nay, every single minute - I just can't stand sitting down any longer than I already do (playing Lexulous, of course) to write them here.
Today, on a whim, I visited my blog and was reminded of how much I like this other blog which I follow. It's Cheryl Somebody-or-other's "Free Range Living" at http://freerangeliving.blogspot.com/2011/10/full-circle.html
So, anyway, at work last night, I was fascinated by a couple of stories we put in the newspaper.
The first was about two women in Sweden who received transplants of their own mothers' uteruses. One of the women had lost her own uterus because of cancer, and the other had been born without a uterus.
Hooray for them, and good luck. However, something I've always ruminated about is, if natural selection is the way the human race improves itself, are we doing ourselves any favors by inducing reproduction in people unable to reproduce on their own? Both women will now undergo in vitro fertilization with their own harvested eggs. If the one carries a predisposition for cancer, and the other carries some flaw causing a uterus to not develop, won't they just be passing it on to future generations? I'm not advocating denying anyone the joy of having their own child. After all, I challenged nature myself, by getting pregnant again after two miscarriages. (What's that, Nature? You don't think I should reproduce? You think I should take the hint? Well, we'll just see about that!) Just wondering where the human race is heading and whether we're lacking a basic respect for said nature.
The other story was about rampant adult obesity in the U.S. (I'm now down to merely overweight, thanks to a recent bout with Weight Watchers). By the year 2030, a new report says, nearly 50 percent of adults in most states will be obese. Now. To relate this to the previous story. If these people are too fat to fornicate, should they be allowed to reproduce via other means? Won't that just be setting us up for 100 percent obesity by, say, 2080? And then won't the U.S., with all that extra weight tramping around on it, be in danger of actually sinking into the seas, and everyone will die?
These threads deserve expansion, but I'm so blown away by all the ethical implications, I can't oblige right now.
Today, on a whim, I visited my blog and was reminded of how much I like this other blog which I follow. It's Cheryl Somebody-or-other's "Free Range Living" at http://freerangeliving.blogspot.com/2011/10/full-circle.html
So, anyway, at work last night, I was fascinated by a couple of stories we put in the newspaper.
The first was about two women in Sweden who received transplants of their own mothers' uteruses. One of the women had lost her own uterus because of cancer, and the other had been born without a uterus.
Hooray for them, and good luck. However, something I've always ruminated about is, if natural selection is the way the human race improves itself, are we doing ourselves any favors by inducing reproduction in people unable to reproduce on their own? Both women will now undergo in vitro fertilization with their own harvested eggs. If the one carries a predisposition for cancer, and the other carries some flaw causing a uterus to not develop, won't they just be passing it on to future generations? I'm not advocating denying anyone the joy of having their own child. After all, I challenged nature myself, by getting pregnant again after two miscarriages. (What's that, Nature? You don't think I should reproduce? You think I should take the hint? Well, we'll just see about that!) Just wondering where the human race is heading and whether we're lacking a basic respect for said nature.
The other story was about rampant adult obesity in the U.S. (I'm now down to merely overweight, thanks to a recent bout with Weight Watchers). By the year 2030, a new report says, nearly 50 percent of adults in most states will be obese. Now. To relate this to the previous story. If these people are too fat to fornicate, should they be allowed to reproduce via other means? Won't that just be setting us up for 100 percent obesity by, say, 2080? And then won't the U.S., with all that extra weight tramping around on it, be in danger of actually sinking into the seas, and everyone will die?
These threads deserve expansion, but I'm so blown away by all the ethical implications, I can't oblige right now.
