2 ms·
Obviously, this is just my opinion, but no, I believe it's possible that the Georgia definition may be exploited, particularly because the intent behind the law
by waterheater 3y ago
Obviously, this is just my opinion, but no, I believe it's possible that the Georgia definition may be exploited, particularly because the intent behind the law was to protect mothers (a natural person), not an artificial womb owned by a corporation (an artificial person).
- RecycledEle 3y agoI expect any law that defines a "womb" as being inside a woman will change once artificial wombs become possible.
- waterheater 3y agoOne can hope, though that's my main point in talking about it. The paradigm of artificial wombs will be a literal "brave new world". I wonder what the downstream effects will be when a company offers BaaS (Babies as a Service). Seems studying the present-day cloud may serve as an effective foil.