Neil Patrick Harris and his partner David Bertka are expecting twins via a surogate mother. My sister the lesbian’s parnter had two children via AID. Mrs. Hal Briston was a gestational surrogate for a gay couple.
What are thoughts on this?
How should we stop them? Judo?
A flippant response, but seriously: I can’t imagine much more odious infringement on liberty than telling a person they’re not allowed to procreate.
Congratulations!
Is it a Boy or a Girl?
Are they handing out cigars?
Other than that I don’t think its much of my business.
When did this become society’s business, or the government’s?
Well, as you know, gay people have been spawning (what a charming expression) since there is gay people, they just did it the old-fashioned way. Same as fertile straights, come to think of it.
Now, there are several questions one may be looking at:
-
Should gay people be allowed to spawn?
A: What do you propose as an alternative, forced sterilization? For what Kinsey number ranges, extreme gayness, bi, has looked at someone from the same gender and thought “nice ass” once? -
Should gay people be able to use assisted fertility methods?
A: Same as straights, yes. -
Should that be covered under whatever health schemes are in place locally?
A: In my opinion, those schemes shouldn’t take sexual orientation into account.
Thoughts on this are just fine.
Explain to me what, in your view, is the harm of gay people ‘spawning’, as you put it, and maybe we can move on from there.
Fabulously!
But it wouldn’t contravene the text of the Federal Constitution. Only an activist judge would strike such a law down.
Every piece of literature I’ve seen on the issue has concluded that gay couples are equal, if not better, at parenting than straights. While I don’t find it too hard to dismiss the “better” notion as self-selection bias*, I don’t see any reason why a gay couple shouldn’t have a baby.
*How many straight couples have “oops” babies? How many gay couples? Which do you think would be better at raising kids?
I’ve got no problem with it.
Since you brought it up in the first place, what are your thoughts on it?
If anything, maybe we should stop straight people from spawning.
I think it’s fantastic when people who dearly want to become parents but aren’t able through traditional means are able to find a way of doing so.
I don’t know what the OP is getting at. Even the most religious, conservative person on this MB isn’t going to support a ban on gay people “spawning”.
As for me, as long as they can swim upriver, I say let them spawn 'til dawn!
Jeez, Annie, was your account hacked? Or is this a parody of another thread I missed? It doesn’t sound like you in the OP.
But…just in case you’re off your meds* or somethin’ and want an actual answer, I’ll join the chorus with: my thoughts are somewhere between “none of my business” and “Congratulations! What a cute baby! My babysitting rates start at $10 an hour,” depending on how well I know the spawners in question.
*rhetorically speaking. Annie’s not on or off any pertinent meds that I know of. 
It is none of my business.
Under your legal analysis though, it would be “Constitutional”, wouldn’t it?
What the hell are you trying to do in this thread?
Well, I suppose it depends on your definition of ‘activist.’
It’s true that the text of the Constitution is silent on the precise issue. But there is long-standing case law that supports the proposition that procreation is a basic liberty. In 1942, in Skinner v. Oklahoma, the court discussed a law permitting sterilization of habitual criminals, and said:
And there is long-standing case law that the the Constitution protects liberties that are basic, that are implied by th every concept of ordered liberty, as discussed in 1937’s Palko v. Connecticut:
You could perhaps argue that the judges in 1939 and 1942 were activist. But even if they were, it’s too late to correct that error. Today, those concepts are a basic part of our jurisprudence, with substantial portions of constitutional framework underpinned by their rationale. Upsetting the applecart by making such a sweeping change would itself be activist.
See above.
In her defense, I don’t think her post indicates that she is against it, and I hope she just used the term “spawn” as a cute shortcut.