- Joined
- Aug 7, 2008
- Messages
- 4,332
- Reaction score
- 5
Personally, I don't like the idea of surrogacy or creating "designer babies" anyway. There are thousands upon thousands of children all over the world languishing in orphanages or foster homes. Why couldn't these guys have looked there first?
Deaf babies and children are considered "hard to place," so they might have gone to the top of the list as potential adoptive parents. Instead they turned to the "rent a womb" option, which to me is exploitive in cases like this where there is no family or friendship connection with the mother.
Guess it's a done deal now anyway. To me, it was not the most moral way to go about it.
I think this is an unfair comment. You assumed that it would have been easy for them to adopt a baby or have a surrogate baby within the US. I can tell you that this is quite untrue, at least the surrogate baby within the US.
My friend works in an in-vitro clinic. There is an... "unwritten rule" that absolutely NO gay couples are allowed to use their services. They cannot say why but they simply say "We feel that we cannot provide you services", being all PC. Even though I do not have first hand experience with adoption services, how much do you wanna bet that they do the same thing?
I do agree that we need to encourage people to adopt kids within our country, although I do admit, I do want my own child rather than adopt. However, if I cannot have kids, I'll rather adopt then do some in-vitro thing. Dunno if that makes it "better".

