Jazzyfizzle, it's apparent...
That you didn't fully READ my earlier posts to which you're
(over)reacting.
1) With respect to my assessment that many people will rapidly dye once things fall apart (SHTF) who are diabetics requiring insulin, hemophiliacs needing periodic blood transfusions, oxygen-tank-dependent emphysema/lung cancer/asbestosis/black lung sufferers, kidney failure patients requiring frequent dialysis, past organ transplant recipients that must take antirejection drugs the rest of their lives, severely autistic children that must be watched 24/7 so they don't take action that gets them killed or severely injured (post-SHTF, same thing), pacemaker/antifibrillator-dependent heart disease sufferers, etc.:
Awareness of what will likely happen is NOT the same thing as advocacy. I don't wish that those things would happen, and would not consider doing anything to bring them about. Neither do I think that those sad outcomes are generally going to be avoidable for very long. (If you think that a deep, longterm breakdown in social order, technology, electrical power generation, trade, travel, and the economy is not going to have those kinds of effects upon the vulnerable, feel free to describe how just this once, social disaster will work differently than it essentially always has.)
I have said nothing on this subject here that is reprehensible to anyone that thinks all the way through it. Neither are my words controversial to anyone who's considered doom for any length of time, i.e., the majority of long-time TTOL board members.
================================================== ===
About my other point you lost it over, the (quick, simple, cheap, noninjurious) paternity test I will do the child or children our IVF/gestational surrogate project will likely bear for us to raise:
1) Since my wife is not directly biologically involved until birth (when she begins nursing and the majority of care), it is not a test of her honor in any way. It is a (partial) test of the clinic doing what it is supposed to do; they do screw up in somewhere between 1/1000 and 1/10,000 cases. I mentioned to her that people on TTOL found this particular part of our planning offensive, and she was amused; if she doesn't have an issue with finding it offensive, logically how could anyone else?
2) you obviously did NOT read my earlier post on this thread about this subject. I will repost it here, so you don't have to go to the trouble of clicking back a couple of pages:
================================================== ====
================================================== ====
"The massive amount of sexual betrayal that women have gotten by with doing for a long time that commonly never, or very belatedly gets found out by men is still a huge dirty secret to most people in this country. Easily half of all rape accusations that go to trial were bogus, for example; remember the four members of the Duke University lacrosse team who were railroaded, and only major money spent on investigation by their families (that most such men would not have) stopped them from felony conviction and long imprisonment? The vast majority of men who get cuckolded by their wives or longtime unmarried partners (who bore children supposedly theirs genetically) are completely blindsided by it, if they do by some fluke find out about it years later, even very intelligent men.
I don't have the hubris to think that my ability to discern other people's likely private moral choices in such matters is that much better than the vast majority of other bright, educated men. That is why I would think very highly of ALL men doing paternity testing on their children, ideally shortly after birth, but certainly ASAP after hearing of this, even later in life.
Modern technology has made possible stopping a lot of injustice, if applied properly. Think of all the hundreds of men serving long sentences for rape that DNA testing has recently gotten released, as just one example of this. One of the fundamental axioms of justice is that the one who does wrong is not supposed to profit by it. A woman who gets by fraud one man (commonly her husband) to support and raise another man's child (thinking it is his genetic child) is precisely a person who has done wrong. That is a deep, terrible betrayal, one that demands be brought to the light of day whenever possible, and the option for the betrayed people of inflicting (legal, financial, and social) consequences upon the betrayer.
=================================================
From this defunct men's-issues site: http://web.archive.org/web/200807020...ity_test.shtml
"From the Guardian, 1998-07-14: "More than 25 years ago the consultant obstetrician E E Phillipp reported to a symposium on embryo transfer that blood tests on between 200 and 300 women in a town in the south-east of England revealed that 30 per cent of their children could not have been fathered by the men whose blood groups had also been sampled".
From the Dallas Morning News 1999-10-31: "DNA Diagnostics Center … an industry leader, says 30 percent of the men it tests prove to be misidentified. Similar numbers come from the Texas attorney general's office, which enforces child support: About a quarter of the men who disputed paternity in the last year turned out to be right. In Florida, the proportion was one-third".
From the Sunday Times 2000-01-23: "David Hartshorne, spokesman for Cellmark, said that in about one case in seven, the presumed father turns out to be the wrong man".
From the Santa Barbara News-Press 2000-02-27: "For the population as a whole, "The generic number used by us is 10 percent," said Dr. Bradley Popovich, vice president of the American College of Medical Genetics. [15 to 25 % has been determined from blood tests of parents and offspring in Canada and the US.]"
From The Age 2000-03-26: "About 3000 paternity tests are carried out a year in Australia. In about 20 per cent of cases the purported father is found to be unrelated to the child. This figure is estimated to be 10 per cent in the general community".
From The REPORT Newsmagazine 2000-04-24: "The rate of wrongful paternity in "stable monogamous marriages," according to the Max Planck Institute in Munich, Germany, ranges from one in 10 with the first child to one in four with the fourth".
From the Independent 2000-05-12: "... biologists Robin Baker and Mark Bellis ... review of paternity studies also suggested frequent infidelity, with extra-pair paternity running between 1.4 per cent and 30 per cent in different communities".
From The Globe and Mail 2000-05-20: "Anecdotal evidence suggests these numbers bear out in Canada as well…. Maxxam Analytics in Guelph, Ont., performs approximately two paternity tests a day. And according to Dr. Wayne Murray, head of the human DNA"
========================================
Originally Posted by AngelDance
