I am not quite sure why these pictures are on your website. These children are with their birth parents. They were not adopted or taken away from anyone. The egg donor and the surrogate are not their parents at all. So I am very confused by your use of these pictures.
The children are with their sperm donor fathers who chose to USE women as a means to their end. They engaged in surrogacy, a practice which is illegal in most of the civilized world including - I am proud to say - my home state of New Jersey. it is illegal because it is immoral and I am also proud to have been on the forefront of the fight to make it illegal here. Too bad other states did not follow. Selling eggs and sperm should also be made illegal, IMO, especially when it is done anonymously. These practices are akin to selling body parents only worse because they produce living human being with total disregard to their need to their family medical history or simple human need to know their progenitors - a right that all others take for granted as they do their genealogical searches etc. I hope that clarifies my interest in this "case." And BTW - I also think it sick and bizarre that these pictures were flaunted on national television. It's always interesting to me to see who flaunts their children and who protects their privacy from the media.
Showing pictures of your children is not sick and bizarre. It's normal behavior of new, happy parents. How is celebrating your children with the world harmful? These babies were not borne of an anonymous surrogate; they have family medical histories. NPH and his partner used a surrogacy agency and knew the surrogate mother. And just because something goes against your morals doesn't mean it should be illegal. These babies are happy, healthy, and taken care of, and I don't know what else you would want for them.
wow i didnt know that how nerrow minded some people truely are. a srrogate is not only for a gay couple to have children but it is also in use for women that for some reason had not have children, being pragnant is harful to their health or their bodys just can not carry a child to turm. so before you get to high upon your horse maybe you should take the time to look all the big picture, not just the one at the end of your nose.
I am not homophobic. I march for gay rights. I - like many nations, religions and ethisicts - am opposed to paid surrogacy regardless of whether it is used by gay or straight people. It is immoral as baby selling. You would have someone else risk their life because pregnancy if harmful for health??
Personally, I like some order in my world! Don't you? I want to know WHO my children are hanging out with or marrying. Is there insanity in the lineage? Was a grandparent a pervert? The above 2 dudes BRAGGED & LAUGHED hysterically about not knowing "whose is whose!" These two admirable guys mixed up their sperm and have no clue whose kid is whose. Whoever thinks that this is a perverted, sick, burden to put on the innocent children that you purport to love, raise your hands!
This is an addendum to my above comment: As I read the somewhat recent People Magazine article about Neil Patrick Harris and his partner concocting their twins in Frankenstein's - Hitler's laboratory, I saw Harris and his partner as 2 kids playing video games. They were laughing, and carrying on. They were so proud of the fact that they don't know "whose is whose" - which of their sperm fathered which twin. They think this is funny! And our society has been praising them to the hilt for their great accomplishment!
I could not agree more. And did you notice how classy - and cute - Mariah Carey handled showing a baby pic??
Get over it! Do you watch these talk shows where women don't know who the daddy is? They run through several men before they know who it is. At least they know these babies belong to the partner they love and that's what matters. The children are theirs and it's their family. Nothing any of you say is going to change that so worry about your own sins, infidelities, and moral values! I'm sure you all have a mirror in your houses but do you have the testicular fortitude to gaze into it and see what you really are and pick your own lives apart? I doubt it. So back off two people in love who want to have a family. Look at Elton John, he has a son now and he's happy. It doesn't make him a bad person. It makes him a proud father and I'm sure all these children will be better off than most of the children in the world.
Anon,Did your Mommy ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? No one here is condoning anyone else's disgusting, thoughtless, careless behavior in regards to procreation. Some may have done far worse things than Neil Patrick Harris. That still does not make this right - and in fact something that is flaunted and applauded! No one is holding up the women you speak of as wonderful human beings as they are Neil and his partner. Why does the public not only accept this but celebrate it as a wonderful and loving thing?? These two men love one another. So what? This is not about THEM. It is about two other human beings they chose to CREATE. It is also thus about the 130,000 children in foster care who might benefit from being taken and cared for by people who want to be parents. But they chose to turn their back on that route toward parenthood and instead felt the need to have a child that was somehow more "theirs" because half the child's genes are theirs, while at the very same time totally ignoring and dismissing the other half of their children's genetic heritage! How ironic, selfish and thoughtless! What do these children inherit from their egg donor? Will they be able to provide them with that information? Are you aware that adoptees and children of ART grow into adults and suffer because of these thoughtless decisions their parents made? That in wanting a child "of their own" they were so narrow minded they never thought of the rights of the human beings they so created? These kids risk committing incest and need to know their COMPLETE medical family history! Grow up. Just because others may be worse, morally, does not make this right! If a person commits murder do we say, well, he's ot as bad as serial killers who kill many?? I think not!
Congratulations to you Neil and David. Your babies are beautiful and they will be loved as you can tell in the photos.
If you don't like it, don't do it, it's that simple. If you don't like gay people to have children maybe you should go live in Afghanistan or Iraq, or come back to Medieval Age. We're sorry, that's the future. I don't need your moral values: I already have mine and are way more respectful than yours.
My objections - if you could read - are yo the buying and selling of human beings and the makings of human beings as well as the rental of human beings and calling human beings 'ovens" as well as treating children like objectified DOLLS to play dress up with! My objections are the same when heterosexual couples did this.
"These practices are akin to selling body parents only worse because they produce living human being with total disregard to their need to their family medical history or simple human need to know their progenitors - a right that all others take for granted as they do their genealogical searches etc"Mirah, I married a man who was adopted and have had three children with him. We have very limited knowledge of his family medical history. Yes, he has the option of meeting his biological mother, but not his biological father. Should it have been illegal for me to have children with my husband? Would that be logical? Your arguments just won't stand on this one.
"Selling eggs and sperm should also be made illegal, IMO, especially when it is done anonymously. These practices are akin to selling body parents only worse because they produce living human being with total disregard to their need to their family medical history or simple human need to know their progenitors - a right that all others take for granted as they do their genealogical searches etc."Mirah, I married a man who was adopted and have 3 children with him. We have extremely limited knowledge of his family medical history. We may have the option of meeting his biological mother, but most likely NOT his biological father. Should our union/children be made 'illegal'? If your argument is about children knowing their family medical history, I think you don't have a case. Also, look at the limited knowledge of medicine 100+ years ago. People don't necessarily know what killed their ancient ancestors and if it was something that could have been passed on in genes. Think about this realistically and how laws like that affect a whole range of people not just those that you disagree with.
I should have clarified that statement by stating it's a right all other non-adopted and non-artificially and commercially created persons have.i am very opposed to ALL such practices which deny people their medical history and am a HUGE proponent of adoptee rights, as you would see if you browsed around my blog!
Post a Comment