Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by *GG*, Jul 30, 2014.
The moral argument for "the person will never be born" is quite a cop out. Huge amounts of ovaries and astronomical numbers of sperm will never result in children, due to lack of fertilization - should we mourn everything that might have been? It's even less convincing than when the same argument is used to oppose birth control.
And as far as "unburdening" people with knowledge of horrible illnesses and deaths that they're going to develop - what better way to do that than by ensuring that they won't get the disease in the first place? Ignorance is a stupid policy in general.
Both arguments seem to be focused around religious precepts, and have long since been discarded by mainstream society in a variety of contexts.
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.