male pregnancy, immoral? Options

[*[2]Nekked*]

http://malepregnancy.com

wow science is really advancing huh? there are some people who disagree with this new development because they think that it defies nature and god's will.

one (pregnant) woman complains that she is appalled that a man could share the same experience she is having with her unborn child, and that the miracle of pregnancy is something only women should experience.

i however think this is a great step in science, because what if you wanted to have children, but your body wasnt fit to nurture and support a living child inside you? could your partner carry the child instead? some women complain that men should have to go through the pain of child birth, and now this is their chance.

[Spirited Away]

We can rule out the social argument of:"it's not right for men to bear children because it's not their 'role' to do so". The traditional roles do not mean much to many people anymore. Sure, many men still believe in chilvalry and being the bread winner, but that logic cannot be applied to the majority of the developed world.

So, I find that the only angle of attack to the IMORALITY of male pregnancy is from the physical imperatives... for now.

Physically, the male species do not have the anatomies to nurture a growing fetus and a baby. Physically, it goes against nature. Physically, it goes against the process of mating/intercourse to have a pregnancy, which brings us back to a full circle of it being unnatural.

I understand that there are a variety of options to care for a growing child, but this is where the physical limitations of the male show their pathetic faces. There can be no arguement that women have the assets to bear children and to feed them naturally. Having thus such physical assets, women are in tune and perhaps will have a more emotional attachment to the child growing in their wombs because their bodies make them inclined to have strong maternal feelings. Of course, there is NO scientific evidence to back my assumption, but I trust that mothers will swear to it. Why would we have breasts, if not to feed our children? Why would we have vaginas if not to give birth to them? Is it not unnatural to have breasts and vaginas and not use them for what they are meant to do?

There are too many ways to refute this argument so far but I'm going to stop here and see what the responses are... I'll continue from there. This is an iffy subject and I don't really have solid stance on it.