When trying to answer “If you are hit by two atomic bombs, should you have kids?”, I believe it's fair to take into account both situations. And then I believe the general answer is ‘No’.
More in line with the article the headline could've been “If you're hit by an atomic bomb, is it possible to have kids years after?”. To which apparently the answer is ‘Yes’.
(i.e. it says "have" which means a future action not "keep" meaning inaction - if you want to nitpick.)
Deciding to abort a baby due to bomb exposure is a completely different question, both morally and biologically.
The situations are so incredibly different (DNA can repair things a living organism can not) that yet again I'm amazed at how you combine them. Is it ignorance? Trolling? A simple refusal to back down from a mistake?
However, I simply disagree with you. Which doesn't per se mean I'm ignorant, trolling, or refusing to back down from a mistake.
To me, 'Having children' means you birth them and raise them. By shooting your sperm during unprotected sex you didn't just 'make babies' or 'have children'. I personally believe life does not start at conception, and as long as they look like tadpoles, I won't acknowledge them as something human. Heck, I even have my doubts about newborns. I find babies annoying and ugly as sin, and I doubt they have much of a psyche to speak of.
(Granted, the last statement may not be a healthy perspective; I blame eXistenZ — http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120907/ )
I do intend to raise children. I suspect I'll feel differently about those then, and probably even about other people's children.
I've seen it happen to several of my friends who have become fathers, I have no illusion that it will be different for me.
Article is about getting pregnant, and you post info about people who are already pregnant. Well obviously they are different. What I don't understand is why you think they are the same. (I guess that's why you didn't hide it? You don't even realize there is a difference?)
> this doesn't sound like a glowing recommendation
And you prefer to ignore the studies that found no problems? Because some girls "thought they got sick more often"?