Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HawaiianGecko
Now with technology, sperm donors and "uterobots" - women willing to sell or give away the flesh of their flesh - any random collection of human beings can "parent."

I'd take an exception to author's implications and use of term "uterobots" here. Said women are providing a service; no more, no less. And while the morality of providing such services may be questioned (like prostitution), casting sly comparisons with slavery is dishonest. Also, it would be quite dishonest to mark such mere "rent-a-womb" or "egg donor" as a mother, especially if she didn't provide the egg...
23 posted on 07/29/2005 10:50:06 AM PDT by MirrorField (Just an opinion from atheist, minarchist and small-l libertarian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MirrorField
The word robota (and its derivatives) occurs in the Czech, Polish, Russian, and - as I recollect - Ukrainian languages (in Russian it transliterates as rabota) and has the same meaning in each: work; and robotnik means worker.

Thus a "uterobot" is a "womb-worker." That's straightforward enough. If it seems to have a negative connotation, it may be because we sense there's something wrong with the objectification, reification, "thingification" of babies and mothers, whose personal relationship with each other --- like the personal relationship of lovers --- ought not to be reduced to a laboratory procedure or a commercial transaction.

27 posted on 07/29/2005 11:11:25 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Veritatis Splendor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson