(March 3, 2016 at 3:41 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 3, 2016 at 3:22 pm)KUSA Wrote: Sterilization and controlled test tube babies.

But that would take away people's freedom to reproduce and have their own children as they wanted to. No one would ever go for that.

The rich masters of the world would. Not for you but for them.

(March 3, 2016 at 4:07 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: If there ever is an anti aging/immortality pill, I doubt it will be legal.

Highly doubt it would be available in pill form.

Likely an expensive gene treatment would be required

(March 3, 2016 at 10:02 am)Rextos Wrote: ideally i would like to die around 30 or 40, id hate to get super old and die slowly like that...  but it would suck to not die naturally because imagine if you went to kill yourself, but then you survived and became paralyzed for life and unable to die? and if nobody killed you it would be Possibly an eternal existence in stasis, closest thing to a real eternal hell!

My dad was paralyzed at age 34 (not too long after my mother found out she was pregnant with me). Never once, did that man complain about never being able to walk again, or use his right arm/hand or about having a speech impediment. All these things happened to him after a brain aneurysm. Who's to say everyone would complain?

And wanting to die by age 30 or 40? Haven't lived much of a life have you? I'm 44 and a student in school, having a great time. I'm glad to be alive right now, even with some major life hiccups at the moment.

I think you think about things too much. Go have some fun and enjoy your youth.

(March 3, 2016 at 10:27 am)AFTT47 Wrote:

(March 3, 2016 at 10:16 am)Alex K Wrote: Haha, what's up with these kids who think dying at 30 the latest is a great idea. People seriously lack imagination what to do with their lives. I'd need ten lives to do all the shit I'd like to do.

No kidding! I'd just as soon as never have been born than to be limited to 75 or so years. I'm a slow mover. I need that long just to get past childhood.

(March 3, 2016 at 10:47 am)Chad32 Wrote: I'm one of those that would rather not live into my nineties, really. I mean there are still good times now, but I'm not all that adventurous.

There must be something wrong with me, I'm looking at 150 years then I'll decide if I want to go on or chuck it.

(March 3, 2016 at 3:41 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 3, 2016 at 3:22 pm)KUSA Wrote: Sterilization and controlled test tube babies.

But that would take away people's freedom to reproduce and have their own children as they wanted to. No one would ever go for that.

There is another reason why immortality (and no procreation) is not desirable. Do you know the adage - progress is made one funeral at a time? It's true. Without people dying and young ones with fresh minds taking the helm, society would calcify intellectually. Imagine the world were populated ny old codgers who made up their minds about things in 1720! I'm only 36 and already like - you youngsters with your facebooks, get off my lawn! And they're like - facebook? Dude, that's so 2008. Time to kick the bucket!

(March 3, 2016 at 4:18 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: Likely an expensive gene treatment would be required

Which brings us back to the general problem of all these medical advancements. As opposed to the last century when societies moved in a social direction, advanced medicine is quickly turning into a commodity for the rich and powerful. It would be the same, if something bordering on immortality came to be a reality. I wouldn't want to live in a society like that, since it would look like ancient Sparta. The masters up on the shiny hill, the slaves down in the valley, toiling the fields.

There's also another, very real, aspect. Even if I go with the narrative of everyone being immortal, you can't carry on with the birth rates as they are. The world would become inhabitable within a century or two. So someone would have to make the decision of who's allowed to reproduce.

Sorry, but for all we know about our world and the people running the show, immortality seems like the premisse for a scifi horror novel.

Moral of the story: don't mess with the circle of life.

(March 4, 2016 at 4:57 am)Alex K Wrote:

(March 3, 2016 at 3:41 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: But that would take away people's freedom to reproduce and have their own children as they wanted to. No one would ever go for that.

There is another reason why immortality (and no procreation) is not desirable. Do you know the adage - progress is made one funeral at a time? It's true. Without people dying and young ones with fresh minds taking the helm, society would calcify intellectually. Imagine the world were populated ny old codgers who made up their minds about things in 1720! I'm only 36 and already like - you youngsters with your facebooks, get off my lawn! And they're like - facebook? Dude, that's so 2008. Time to kick the bucket!

I can understand where you're coming from. People get set enough in their ways, they don't need these fancy doodads. Everybody didn't have cellphones with internet access when I was growing up. Hell, even the internet was this slow dial-up thing. Video games didn't normally have characters that you'd cry over if they had a death scene. Undertale is the new big thing now. Back in my day, we had Super Mario Brothers.

(March 4, 2016 at 11:12 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Moral of the story: don't mess with the circle of life.

Moral of the story: Simplistic answers to complicated ethical questions as theists cherish them, are useless at best and dangerous at worst. Don't mess with the circle of life. Psssh! Have you ever gone see a doctor, lady? Then you have messed with it already.

We are all forgetting that all of us are already immortal. We have a soul that lives on. Our current body will be shed off like old skin.