Wave of the future: Baby-sicle~

[Guest]

I'm a sick fuck. But I wonder if this baby will always be cold. *grin*

Dreams on Ice

so, now we have hope. the women who have always wanted to have a baby but couldn't have a new pathway.

question: if we are so over populated maybe this is natures way of saying enough is enough. Adopt already. What are your thoughts?


(side note: i have gone through major medical treatments just to have babies. i'm not saying this is a bad or good thing...im curious to see what you think.)

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I'm a sick fuck. But I wonder if this baby will always be cold. *grin*

Dreams on Ice

so, now we have hope. the women who have always wanted to have a baby but couldn't have a new pathway.

question: if we are so over populated maybe this is natures way of saying enough is enough. Adopt already. What are your thoughts?


(side note: i have gone through major medical treatments just to have babies. i'm not saying this is a bad or good thing...im curious to see what you think.)

Whatever floats your boat...I thinks it commendable that you or anyone else would go through so much to have a child, to love and take care of...at least unitl they're eighteen.

I wish I could get mine to move the fuck out of my house and he's 35!

 

[Guest]

Dreams on Ice - very sweet name for it.

There are real reasons this is necessary, as was mentioned in the article (cancer treatments, etc.)

The adoption process is arduous.

This procedure works for many.

 

[Guest]

thanks guys.
guess im playing devils advocate?

i totally understand about the adoption process. we started looking into that after the fourth miscarriage (twins. dear god that sucked.) it is too difficult by far but i realize too that there are processes in place for protection. i think...just me...that its the interpretation of processes that prolong adoption. well, that and money.

is it easier for me to say, "adopt!", now that i have kids of my own? maybe. would i do things differently? no. would i be open to adoption in future? not that i can see but hell, if we win the lotto, without a doubt id be very open to it.

what an ethical conundrum this whole frozen s & o bit can be. could we potentially wean off natural selection by producing blond headed, blue eyed boys and girls?
would we find ourselves inundated with too many boys and not enough girls? isnt this what china is facing right now with the one baby law?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

thanks guys.
guess im playing devils advocate?

i totally understand about the adoption process. we started looking into that after the fourth miscarriage (twins. dear god that sucked.) it is too difficult by far but i realize too that there are processes in place for protection. i think...just me...that its the interpretation of processes that prolong adoption. well, that and money.

is it easier for me to say, "adopt!", now that i have kids of my own? maybe. would i do things differently? no. would i be open to adoption in future? not that i can see but hell, if we win the lotto, without a doubt id be very open to it.

what an ethical conundrum this whole frozen s & o bit can be. could we potentially wean off natural selection by producing blond headed, blue eyed boys and girls?
would we find ourselves inundated with too many boys and not enough girls? isnt this what china is facing right now with the one baby law?

It's a bit confusing for the adopting parents with all the rules and regulations and processes you have to go through to qualify as parents. When down the street there is a couple who can have children easily although they aren't fit to raise rats let alone children. Hoards and hoards of children.

 

[Guest]

It's a bit confusing for the adopting parents with all the rules and regulations and processes you have to go through to qualify as parents. When down the street there is a couple who can have children easily although they aren't fit to raise rats let alone children. Hoards and hoards of children.

True!

i was so angry when i would read about abused kids in families of many...when i couldnt even have one. it seemed so wrong to me.

 

[Penelope Street]

i was so angry when i would read about abused kids in families of many...when i couldnt even have one. it seemed so wrong to me.

It is wrong, and you're far from the only one angered by such things.

 

[Guest]

It is wrong, and you're far from the only one angered by such things.

nods. i know...feeling like hands are tied when it comes to make the changes that 'i' think should be done. one day...one day.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

The term BABY-SICLE brought to mind Arlo Guthrie's, Motocycle, song. Wouldn't take much tinkering for the lyrics to fit, sorta.


I don't want a pickle,
Just wanna have a baby-sicle.

And I don't want a tickle,
Just wanna have a baby-sicle.

And I don't want to try (the old fashioned way)
Just wanna have a baby-si-cle.


Okay, maybe a little more tinkering would be in order.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[3113]

Adopt already. What are your thoughts?

This is terrifically hard in the U.S. I know two couples who want to adopt, and it's harder than auditioning for a staring role in a movie. They have to create books with pictures and information on themselves, and they're in a long line of other couples who want to adopt as well. The competition is fierce.

Once approved by a mother who says, "Yes you can have my baby--" It's no sure thing. The mom can change her mind--and there's a dad's rights as well. Even adopting a foster child is difficult. And everytime a couple gets their hopes up and then the deal falls through, they're crushed and crushed again. One couple has been told that they're not likely to get a child because they're too old (that is, they started trying to adopt in their mid-thirties and now they're in their early 40's).

How long should they try to adopt? How much should they go through? How many times do they need to hear "Sorry, no"? Which is why so many American couples adopt children from other places around the world. The rules are far less strict and complex.

So, I can't really find it wrong for a person, especially a single woman, to skip this arduous process of trying to convince a government agency to give her a baby or even a child to raise. Easier for her to use science and have her own kid.

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=vella_ms]I'm a sick fuck. But I wonder if this baby will always be cold. *grin*

Dreams on Ice

so, now we have hope. the women who have always wanted to have a baby but couldn't have a new pathway.

question: if we are so over populated maybe this is natures way of saying enough is enough. Adopt already. What are your thoughts?


(side note: i have gone through major medical treatments just to have babies. i'm not saying this is a bad or good thing...im curious to see what you think.)[/QUOTE]

~~~

Apologies Vella__ms...I really should not participate here and I know it.

There is an old country music song, something like: "Life gets tejious', and it become tedious for me also to choose a general name to refer to all those who reject an absolute moral concept and prefer to struggle to cover issues that require a moral and ethical judgment such as this one may.

Although you placed a caveat by saying: "if" we are overpopulated, the belief is that we are and that comes through.

Then of course is the unspoken lesbian issue of conceiving a child without a male/father, partner...and I ain't even gonna touch on that...

Not sure if you approve of the Chinese government forcibly limited a couple to one child or if you approve of other governments paying couples bonuses for each additional child the bear or if you approve government intervention at all at any level.

I followed and read the link about frozen sperm and frozen egg and my thought was the efficacy of modern medical science sans any religious overtones of which I have none, I wanna freeze my sperm, you wanna freeze your egg, do so.

Should God or Hillary Clinton determine at what age you can raise a child? I think not.

You say, "adopt already", perhaps as an ecological or environmental ideology? Why not populate the world with blue eyed blonde 160 IQ babies?

My point is...I have an ethical and moral system that works every time; gives me absolute answers to specific questions in every occasion, and I continue to wonder why you folks do not.

amicus...

 

[Guest]

~~~

Apologies Vella__ms...I really should not participate here and I know it.

there is no reason, ami, why you shouldnt participate in this thread.

There is an old country music song, something like: "Life gets tejious', and it become tedious for me also to choose a general name to refer to all those who reject an absolute moral concept and prefer to struggle to cover issues that require a moral and ethical judgment such as this one may.

Although you placed a caveat by saying: "if" we are overpopulated, the belief is that we are and that comes through.

Then of course is the unspoken lesbian issue of conceiving a child without a male/father, partner...and I ain't even gonna touch on that...

yes, but not just a lesbian issue. i know more lesbians that have children then those who do not.

Not sure if you approve of the Chinese government forcibly limited a couple to one child or if you approve of other governments paying couples bonuses for each additional child the bear or if you approve government intervention at all at any level.

from the limited knowledge that i do have re: the chinese government enforcing the birth of only one child, i would have to say i can not come up with a better way to control their out of control population growth. however, that has brought up far more problems which they may have not foreseen. they are now worried about the female population. seems that parents would rather have a boy to carry on the family name.
There are also atrocities that have been brought about by this schema with late abortions, etc.
i have no answer for this problem only that the idea seemed to have merit but then backfired.

I followed and read the link about frozen sperm and frozen egg and my thought was the efficacy of modern medical science sans any religious overtones of which I have none, I wanna freeze my sperm, you wanna freeze your egg, do so.

Should God or Hillary Clinton determine at what age you can raise a child? I think not.

this above comment gave me pause as i never mentioned anything about 'age' or raising a child or god. i am CERTAINLY not going to turn this thread into a religious or political rant.

You say, "adopt already", perhaps as an ecological or environmental ideology? Why not populate the world with blue eyed blonde 160 IQ babies?

when i said adopt already it was more of a idealism. i realize that it is not within the relm of everyone to adopt but neither is it to have invitro. given my druthers, adoption would be far easier to do.

hitler did his best to populate the world with blue eyed blondes... you see what happened there. wouldnt this be on the same level, ethnic cleansing? *cringe*

My point is...I have an ethical and moral system that works every time; gives me absolute answers to specific questions in every occasion, and I continue to wonder why you folks do not.

amicus...

i do have my own ethical and moral system that i believe works best for me. isnt this the basis of our nation, the freedom to each have our own? because i belive in this.

ami, its fine for you to ruffle feathers as i have seen you often do. ive seen you post about how much you love your family and it has touched me. i believe your love for your children and your grandchildren shines brightly. would you love them any differently had they been adopted? i think not, or atleast you don't seem to be the type of person who would.

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=vella_ms]there is no reason, ami, why you shouldnt participate in this thread.



yes, but not just a lesbian issue. i know more lesbians that have children then those who do not.



from the limited knowledge that i do have re: the chinese government enforcing the birth of only one child, i would have to say i can not come up with a better way to control their out of control population growth. however, that has brought up far more problems which they may have not foreseen. they are now worried about the female population. seems that parents would rather have a boy to carry on the family name.
There are also atrocities that have been brought about by this schema with late abortions, etc.
i have no answer for this problem only that the idea seemed to have merit but then backfired.



this above comment gave me pause as i never mentioned anything about 'age' or raising a child or god. i am CERTAINLY not going to turn this thread into a religious or political rant.





when i said adopt already it was more of a idealism. i realize that it is not within the relm of everyone to adopt but neither is it to have invitro. given my druthers, adoption would be far easier to do.

hitler did his best to populate the world with blue eyed blondes... you see what happened there. wouldnt this be on the same level, ethnic cleansing? *cringe*



i do have my own ethical and moral system that i believe works best for me. isnt this the basis of our nation, the freedom to each have our own? because i belive in this.

ami, its fine for you to ruffle feathers as i have seen you often do. ive seen you post about how much you love your family and it has touched me. i believe your love for your children and your grandchildren shines brightly. would you love them any differently had they been adopted? i think not, or atleast you don't seem to be the type of person who would.[/QUOTE]


~~~

Quoted you as the easiest way of referring to your comments....

As I said earlier, I choose not to address the issue of Lesbians raising children as I think nature intended both a male and female influence on the young as a normative nurturing environment for nature's own reasons and not sexual preference.

Your acceptance of the Chinese government's enforcement of a 'one child policy', as an idea of 'merit', leads me to question your concept of individual rights and liberties. Supposing that edict was imposed upon you or your children? In the 'national' interest, if Hillary Clinton signed into law a similar edict, would you think it appropriate in terms of individual rights?

There were those on the thread who did mention age and I think religion, as limiting factors concerning adoption procedures....that was my reference...

Quid pro quo on adoption and in vitro, I see that. My perception was that you were addressing a perceived 'over population' theme, a favorite of the left.

"Hitler" National socialism, (nazism) soviet communism, or chinese communism, are all one and the same; the abrogation of individual human rights in favor of the collective. My thought was that if individuals chose to procreate along whatever genetic lines they decided, it was their right to do so. Not a statist concept as you intimate.

(...i do have my own ethical and moral system that i believe works best for me. isnt this the basis of our nation, the freedom to each have our own? because i belive in this...")

You leave a lot to be desired here. It may work best for you to bake baby girls for your lunch. That would not sit well with me or most of mankind. "The freedom of each to have out own..." yes, of course, but the inherent obligation is to exercise that freedom while respecting the absolute rights of others and not violating them.

One further thing on the 'one child per family' thing, supposing President Amicus imposed that law upon you and your children, in the national interest of course, would you sacrifice your and your children's rights of choice to my edict?

On your last part; that is of course a little personal. I did raise two step children and loved them as my own. I did not and have not considered adopting children and at this stage of life will never do so, but I question your doubt as to my ability to love and accept a child for what it is, regardless.

There is a pragmatic issue involved here that supposition cannot answer. Children not of your blood can truly be 'alien' to your nature. Not sure I can communicate in brevity here on this statement, but I discovered that some children cannot be reached by those who are not their natural parents. Don't give me the bullshit. They are genetically inclined to be something you are not and nothing you can do can resolve that.

amicus...

 

[Vermilion]

As I said earlier, I choose not to address the issue of Lesbians raising children as I think nature intended both a male and female influence on the young as a normative nurturing environment for nature's own reasons and not sexual preference.



On your last part; that is of course a little personal. I did raise two step children and loved them as my own. I did not and have not considered adopting children and at this stage of life will never do so, but I question your doubt as to my ability to love and accept a child for what it is, regardless.

There is a pragmatic issue involved here that supposition cannot answer. Children not of your blood can truly be 'alien' to your nature. Not sure I can communicate in brevity here on this statement, but I discovered that some children cannot be reached by those who are not their natural parents. Don't give me the bullshit. They are genetically inclined to be something you are not and nothing you can do can resolve that.

amicus...

Point number one echoes something my future father in law was saying only yesterday and something that I chose, for family harmony, to not respond to. He seemed to think that it was irresponsible for same sex or single parents to have children - even if the (for the ease of argument let's say it was a f/f couple) sperm donor was known to the couple and intended to be an active part of the child's life. I cannot disagree mire strongly - surely better for any child to be brought into a caring loving family, however unusual than to suffer some of the iniquities wreaked upon children of socially 'normal' families. Look at your own children, I longed to say to him, look how your ex wife abused them - do you not think they would have done better to have had a life lived with just you - a man who would have cared for and loved them? Unfortunately his principles, seemingly like yours Amicus, do not accept that a child who is loved by two parents of the same gender or just one parent is likely to have as happy a life as one who is loved by a mother and father.

Secondly I have known people who have produced children of the same genes but who have been, in every way, alien to each other - genes are not the be-all and end-all. To cite the future in-laws again - the Fiance and his mother could not be more unalike and opposed if they were of different races, colours, nationalities and languages, yet he is of her genes and even bears some familial resemblance to her. Your argument does not hold water.

x
V

 

[amicus]

This has become too personal and too anecdotal to continue, but there is one thing I feel compelled to state, if I can do so clearly.

While it is the ideal, I suppose, to think that children raised in secure, gentle, caring families, prosper and flourish, it seems that the exceptions in our various societies become the artists and the genius's of a generation.

Adversity and hardship in youth seem to act as conflict and competition do in economics, the cream of the crop rise to the top only through pain and suffering.

Please do not think I applaud this aspect of mother nature, I do not. But I am also compelled to acknowledge it.

And although I theorize that a father/mother/child relationship is 'ideally' the most nurturing, I must on the same hand acknowledge that through most of human history, what with wars and other social anomalies, that state of being has seldom been realized.

Life is not as we would have it, it is not ideal, it is as it is and little there is we can do to change it. My only function in addressing these issues is to attempt to understand.

I hope you know that.

amicus...

 

[lucky-E-leven]

On your last part; that is of course a little personal. I did raise two step children and loved them as my own. I did not and have not considered adopting children and at this stage of life will never do so, but I question your doubt as to my ability to love and accept a child for what it is, regardless.


amicus...

You fucking idiot. Why don't you slow down and read before you start responding? She said she didn't think you would love an adopted child or grandchild any less than a child of your own blood. It's sad that you've got your mind all made up about most of the people you post to here, unless of course, they're agreeing with you.

As for why you're even posting in here, I can't tell. You've not really taken a recognizable stand on any one piece of the topic (aside from the fact that you think homosexuals are worthless ... which I'm fairly certain everyone here already knew), and as far as I can tell continue contradicting yourself in an effort to discount other posters' responses.

I don't really have anything to discuss with you. I just wonder why you're being such a jackass to someone that has kindly taken the time to think about what you wrote and respond thoughtfully in order to clear things up.

 

[scriptordelecto]

You fucking idiot. Why don't you slow down and read before you start responding? She said she didn't think you would love an adopted child or grandchild any less than a child of your own blood. It's sad that you've got your mind all made up about most of the people you post to here, unless of course, they're agreeing with you.

As for why you're even posting in here, I can't tell. You've not really taken a recognizable stand on any one piece of the topic (aside from the fact that you think homosexuals are worthless ... which I'm fairly certain everyone here already knew), and as far as I can tell continue contradicting yourself in an effort to discount other posters' responses.

I don't really have anything to discuss with you. I just wonder why you're being such a jackass to someone that has kindly taken the time to think about what you wrote and respond thoughtfully in order to clear things up.

He's reinforcing his self imposed persecution complex.