Posted on 07/09/2014 9:35:06 PM PDT by Citizen Zed
The story of two gay men in Texas who became fathers of twin boys via a surrogate appeared in my Facebook feed a couple of weeks ago, posted by a woman voicing her support for the men and her anger over their legal predicament.
Each man is the biological father of one twin, and each wants to legally adopt the biological son of the other. Because Texas does not recognize same-sex "marriage", the law will not allow the adoption or for the birth certificates to reflect the two fathers as parents of both boys.
So began the cry of discrimination toward these men, and the injustice of the law.
I decided to jump in with quite the opposite perspective. I wasn't expecting my comments to be well-received, but even so, I was stunned at how the thread developed.
What was truly maddening, I said, was that two babies had been manufactured and sold, and now were being denied their mother. It is wrong, I argued, to create by design a home for those babies that intentionally deprives them of their mother. They have a right to know and be cared for by their mother.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
Sad and perverse.
Modern day Gomorrah. It will not stand.
“I recognize something crucial in this picture, something else that is plainly obvious. That baby was searching for his mother. A newborn baby has only one real need, and that is to be put to mother’s breast and smell and feel her skin and suckle. That’s it. Sorry, guys, but that’s reality. Babies are born with a built-in homing device that drives them toward Mom. “
The fathers could be brothers.
Instead of a soft, warm, milk-filled breast, the baby got a coarse, hairy chest.
but wait in every homo relationship one is the male and one the female...weird how that is.
The term “Man-made Chimera” comes to mind.
All this surrogate crap is an abomination. Creating little humans in an unnatural way is a crime against human nature.
While the "mother" was in all likelihood both the egg provider and the incubator, it is also possible to separate these two roles. If convenient for the adults involved. No thought appears to be given to what the child needs.
Of course, it was for my sis in law and my brother in law. Not for a gay couple.
Do you have evidence to show that this is the most likely situation?
The egg market is after young women with specific physical characteristics and proven academic ability, which is why college students are so heavily solicited. These same women are very unlikely to wish to disrupt their lives by gestating, particularly twins. Young college women's disinterest in giving birth is why they account for so many abortions.
(General comment: May we stop saying "egg donation"? Except in very rare cases of intra-family IVF or surrogacy, eggs are sold.)
Very good article.
No evidence.
My assumption, which may indeed be inaccurate, is that the process of artificially inseminating a women is much simpler and less expensive and problematic than in vitro fertilization and implantation in an unrelated surrogate.
I reread the article and on second thought it seems more likely they went the more complicated route. It appears each of the boys is the biological son of one of the men. This outcome is really unlikely in a simple artificial insemination.
It also seems likely that using a surrogate mother biologically unrelated to the child(ren), would reduce possible legal complications if she “changes her mind” during or after the pregnancy.
That's an important point. Artificial insemination is generally used when the mother is going to keep the baby. I've never heard of it in third-party transactions.
Of course, the easiest, cheapest, and most probably successful course is for the biological father to have sex naturally with the biological mother. However, it's probably difficult to get either of them to sell the baby in that case.
And libtards try to figure out these kids grow up to be pissed off monsters who can’t cope with life.
I’m beginning to think that the biggest promoter of “gay marriage” is the legal profession figuring they will have a bull market in divorce cases down the road.
I understand your sister in law’s pain. But policies that start out as the best of intentions often end up being misused. This ALL started because Louise Brown’s parents wanted a baby back in 1978.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.