"Three" Parents, Surrogacy, and Commercialization in Conception and Birth

I've been thinking about this subject for some time.

First, some admissions:

• Getting pregnant was NEVER a problem for me.  I had 3 kids in four years.  Coulda done more, but I was really getting tired of birthin'


• In my younger years, I did follow the crowd and use contraception.  Never had to consider an abortion, which I thank God for.  Some things, it was just a mercy I hadn't been in a position to have to decide upon - I don't know that I'd have decided in a good way.


• There have been days my kids drove me crazy.  Well, the same is true of my husband.  But, I never wished they hadn't been born.

I never had to wrestle with the conflicts between a strong desire to have children, and the ethical problems that lay within that decision.

In high school, we all read "Brave New World" and "1984" (funny, seldom do kids read either these days.  1984 is too uncomfortably close to the near-worship of our current leader.

And, Brave New World, with its manufactured baby products, seems WAY too close to modern elite parenting.

And, it IS an elite problem - they are the ones that delay pregnancy until conception is difficult, if not impossible.  They are the ones (Octo-Mom notwithstanding) who have the money to make their quest for a mini-me possible.  And, they are the ones that can see a potential egg donor or surrogate, and see - what?  A virtual non-person?  A "lesser" human being?  A bought-and-paid-for servant?

Egg donors take enormous risks.  The process of "harvesting" eggs requires the donor to be pumped full of drugs, some of which will imperil future pregnancies, cause premature menopause, or, even, serious illness or death.

The surrogates take risks, too.  They take on the normal risks of pregnancy, plus the added complication of implantation or medical intervention to join sperm to egg.  If the sperm donor is gay, she risks AIDS exposure, hepatitis, or other STD (Yes, I know that the sperm is screened.  Keep in mind that, in the pre-AIDS testing years, such an unknown pathogen couldn't have been guarded against.  Caveat emptor - or rather, let the SELLER beware.).

Here's a thoughtful look at the ethical challenges that commercial child-buying entails.

Here's a look at sperm buying, from a person whose father was "Donor".

Sex was not necessary for me to exist. I was not the natural fruit of a marriage. I was a very clear decision, an economic transaction and exchange of services rendered by buyers and sellers who did not know each other—not even as acquaintances. - See more at: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/03/4628/#sthash.8H149Qag.dpuf

He differentiates between types of immortality:

There are two types of immortality: genetic and memetic. Genetic immortality includes the preservation as well as the reproduction of genes. Living forever like Duncan MacLeod in Highlander is one example of genetic immortality through preservation; freezing your body cryogenically is another. Genghis Khan and his now 16 million living descendants are an example of genetic immortality through reproduction. Memetic immortality, on the other hand, has little to do with the physical matter of our bodies. It is the theory that mental content and "cultural units"—ideas, beliefs, patterns of behavior, etc., can be reproduced from mind to mind—as individuals influence each other to adopt new ways of thinking, preferences, and so on. - See more at: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/03/4628/#sthash.8H149Qag.dpuf

How does the never-present father benefit?

Fifty years ago a man had to devote his life through marriage to pass on his genes. Today he doesn’t even have to buy his mother’s child a drink. - See more at: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/03/4628/#sthash.8H149Qag.dpuf

If the seed of the father contains at least SOME of the character traits - introvert/extrovert, easy-going/uptight, athletic/clumsy - then will our future civilization be shaped - perhaps NOT for the better - by the careless seeding of these absent men?

This woman was charged with crimes.  Read it, and tell me - just how different are her actions from the LEGAL actions of those purchasing surrogates?

To Live Together, or NOT?

Mona Charen wrote about The Marriage Divide - the fact that the lower classes, and, increasingly, the lower middle classes are choosing to build their families without marriage.  She, and I, think that's a bad thing - for reasons that she makes clear in her post.

Mona cites the advice of Carolyn Hax to a young woman asking when she should think about moving in with her boyfriend (of 5 months).  Carolyn sneers at the mom's advice.  I started to reply on the site, but didn't want to bother with registration.

My take:

The mother is sensible - she suggests that the girl wait until it appears that marriage is seriously considered. The girl ties her arguments to what married people have advised; clearly, she is NOT just looking for a wild time. She is serious about her personal feelings; she at least envisions marriage as a possibility.

There is NO indication that the boy in the scenario is anticipating marriage in any serious way.

Like it or not, women have a "sell-by date" - the tick of the biological clock makes their time precious, and short. If, as many women do, she wants to have a family, it makes sense to hedge her bets until at least a ring is offered (Not that I'm all that crazy about a hunk of pressurized carbon. I think it's ridiculous to spend several months gross salary on a piece of jewelry. But, it does put some financial legs into a vague promise of a future together).

[I wrote that above, realizing that there are some women who will use that phrase "sell-by date" as an excuse to trash the whole argument.  I'm simply suggesting that biological fertility is a perishable item.

Men, not having biological pressures, tend to let time slip by. It makes for an uneasy situation, where one is more and more pressured to marry by the clock, and the other lazily resists a final step, because - well, he CAN.

Nothing to do with cows and milk. The mother isn't suggesting that the girl stay a virgin until the day of the wedding (Although, it's not, as you suggest, a bad start to a marriage. At the least, you're limiting the spread of diseases that antibiotics and modern medicine are reaching the end of their ability to curb.)

The mom is just stating the obvious - by staying in her own place, the girl retains a lot more power in the relationship - including the option to break it off without a hassle, date others, if desired, and occupy herself how she likes without worrying about what her boyfriend will think. It may well be the TRUE liberated woman's solution to single life.

Mark Steyn's Latest

As always, the best

.

The Pope Resigns!

This was a shocker!

At first, when another teacher said that Pope Benedict would resign at the end of the month, I thought it was an Onion spoof.

But, I checked - it's really happening. Go to the Vatican site , and see for yourself.

I'm flabbergasted. I never expected this.

But, I'm going to think of it as an opportunity. It's a chance for a new breeze to blow through the Church walls.

Several things occurred to me:

1. Compared to the Cardinals from the JPII era, the Cardinals have been through intensive scrutiny re: the Child Abuse Scandals. Those that stayed, have been vetted.


2. The Church has retired many of the most egregious "Vatican-Lite" personnel. Those that remain are, generally, committed to upholding Church teachings, even against opposition.


3. The retirement will bring in new blood at a time when the Church needs to stand firm, opposing the US Government's intrusion into the policies of its hospitals and other charitable organizations. It's going to be a battle, I suspect straight to the US Supreme Court. (After that, if the answer is not favorable, it may have to go to the Ultimate Supreme Court of God). Both Clergy and Laymen will be tested, and will have to show their backbone.


4. This may set a GOOD precedent. In a time when the clergy of a parish have to retire at a certain age. it's probably a good idea to have SOME sense that the head of the Church might want to pack it in at some time. It's a good argument for basing PART of the vote on the candidate's age. That being said, I'd rather have SOME older people than younger - it truly depends on the individual.


5. Perhaps some orders of priests and nuns might want to consider this precedent, as well. Leadership in the modern age demands a lot of the leaders - both physically and mentally. There are a few of them that might want to re-think their roles in light of this announcement.

I'm choosing to look at this as a GOOD thing.

Post-Election, Post-Holiday Slump

There is a lot on my mind right now:

• Fast & Furious fallout continues. But the media treats the whole thing like a closed issue. Where is Congress on this? Please, PLEASE - write your Congressman, urging them to add their voice to continued hearings - INCLUDING getting access to all of the "privileged" communications.


• Then, right after that, you let them know that SOME of us care that over 300 Mexican nationals, and at least 1 Border Patrol agent, were killed by guns that the Obama administration authorized to sell to "straw purchasers". In fact, they didn't just AUTHORIZE the sale, they PRESSURED gun dealers to allow them.


• The Debt, and the non-existent Budget - 4 years without one - are crushing our economy - at least, that part that remains after the Obamacare juggernaut rolls on by. What is interesting is that the majority of the Tea Party is OLDER Americans - in contrast to the seniors of the AARP - who care more about not leaving debt to the grandchildren than for their own comfort.


• Voter Fraud - it DOES exist, and we need to start doing something about it NOW, before it causes yet another election to be questionable. Begin with:
  
• Voter PHOTO ID. ID must show full face. Obviously, states must provide photo ID for those people who don't drive, or free for those who can't afford it otherwise. The ONLY other ID that may be acceptable, and it will be the STATE'S decision, is fingerprint ID, coupled with indelible ink. If it's good enough for the Middle East, it's good enough here.


• The assault on the Catholic Church must be stopped. Government is forbidden to interfere with the religious practices of citizens, unless they violate the criminal law. Civil law is bound to respect the religious principles of church members. Heck, they even work overtime to make sure that obscure or odd religions can practice freely, even holding that Native Americans can use peyote and other similar substances in the practice of THEIR religion, even though that violates criminal drug laws.

This is just a short list of the things I'm concerned about.

Why Black Participation in Baseball is Falling

The central thesis of this is disheartening.

...baseball is a game taught by fathers, while basketball and football are more often taught by peers in pickup games.

Gerald Hall Jr., the director of a youth-baseball program in Washington, D.C., told Milloy: “If you did a survey, I believe you’d find that the one thing average and above-average players have in common is a father. Baseball is, at heart, a father-and-son sport. And if you’re a kid that has nobody to throw to, nobody to talk to, nobody to discipline you in the way that baseball demands, you’re not likely to play the game.

How unbearably sad.

Debate Ideas to Consider

I've been watching the DNC convention (yes, it was occasionally painful), and have noticed some talking points that are likely to come up in the debate:

• Obama talks about "free" contraception.  It is NOT free, as Mitt should point out, but "taxpayer-paid" contraception, as those who don't pay for their own contraception through their insurance premiums will receive them thanks to the taxpayers.


• Those "tax subsidies" for oil-producers - does Obama mean "reductions in taxes" for legitimate expenses?  Instead of requiring government to "invest" in alternative energy start-ups, why not let the PRIVATE sector do the investing, since that's what they're good at.


• BTW, IF any money is to be given to alternative energy, it should come from NEW oil and gas leases of public land.  That should encourage the federal government to open up land to oil producers.  And, in effect, the old energy will fund development of new energy.


• On suspending deportation of "youngsters" who were brought here by their parents - instead of funding new give-aways, how about pointing out that they already received, free of charge, an education through high school?  And that we are willing to let them leave, without penalty - they will have equal opportunity to get a LEGAL visa in the future, the same as any other person in their home country.


• On gay marriage - is the president willing to stipulate that this will increase the number of people eligible for spousal benefits?  On what grounds?  The real reason for spousal benefits was that, in the past, child-bearing and child-caring responsibilities made a woman temporarily unable to work.  The major cause for special treatment of women in those cases was that pregnancy was unpredictable and could occur without conscious effort to conceive.  That isn't so in any gay relationship - pregnancy has to be planned and specifically desired.


• Obama still hasn't justified ignoring bankruptcy laws and giving special treatment to the auto unions - one of his BIG campaign contributors.


• The economy still is teetering on the verge of collapse, with minorities suffering the worst effects.


• The housing market is still horrible, with many in foreclosure, and mortgagees underwater.


• Although Obama plans to complete closing down the Afghanistan operation, the region is LESS stable than when he took office.  The Mideast is a volatile mess, and the radical Muslims are in charge.  I'm still flying, but the level of threat makes me very uneasy, and the TSA gives me little confidence that they can handle the threats.


• The border is still unsecured; the threats are not just Mexican gangs and illegals, but also reports of Islamicists paying coyotes to assist them in crossing the border.


• Don't forget Fast & Furious.  Obama seems to have.

Reading Humanae Vitae

I was avoiding housework spending a FEW minutes browsing, and found a reference to In Humanae Vitae, the much-derided encyclical from Pope Paul VI, in 1968.

The person linking the English translation said that the entire thing was only about 4 pages long.  This intrigued me, and I decided to read the actual document, rather than what I had previously depended on, excerpts and commentaries.

It's worth reading, especially in light of recent developments with the Catholic Church and Obama's HHS.

We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. (14) Equally to be condemned, as the magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. (15)

Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means. (16)

Those who argue for toleration of a lesser evil are rebuked:

Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general.

That boldfaced part is in line with Pope Benedict XVI's comments about an HIV-infected person using condoms - it is the lesser evil.

Following sections discuss the other consequences of contraception, which affect the quality of the relationship and the nature of the parents' response to a "failure" of contraception.  It's WELL worth reading.