Redefining Marriage Against Woman And Child

“Whenever you get on a train of thought, always make sure you check the ticket to see where it will get you off.”
Ravi Zacharias

Redefining marriage is a train which goes to places many have not even imaged.

The first stop of making marriage genderless or same-sex opens the journey to many other stops – if gender doesn’t matter, why should the number, age, consent, family-connections or species either?

Redefining marriage also redefines parenting and families. And it’s this reality which tracks to another stop along the way – the deeply anti-woman and anti-child practice of creating a subclass of “breeders” through the renting of wombs and the buying of children. Promoting itself as providing “Parenting options for European gay men”, this next stop is known as the “Men Having Babies” conference.
Attended by more than 220 attendees from 12 countries in Brussels, here are some observations from this…

“From the 1950s Belgian wombs were being filled with the sperm of unknown men. Fertility techniques improved and not much later they tapped into new target groups: single women and lesbian couples.

Branding unwanted childlessness as discrimination and injustice, several branches of the LGBT community are lobbying for gay men and transgender women to have biological children of their own.”

“Surrogacy was described as “the act of a woman, altruistic by nature, gestating a child for another individual or couple, with the intent to give the child to the intended parents at birth”.

I have a very different perspective. I would describe it as the outsourcing of a personalized pregnancy that aims the trading/adoption of a donor-conceived child to those who ordered it whilst paying a fee for expenses.

New terms were launched to keep the transactions as business-like as possible: the surrogate mother was called “a carrier”, the egg donor “a genetic material contributor”. Some agencies also offered a money-back guarantees(no kidding) and “Multiple Cycle Package” deals.

Several times speakers advised against adoption. They said that nowadays there are not many young children to adopt and the probability that the mother may decide to keep “your” child is too great a risk. Surrogacy, once again, brought salvation.

Speakers strongly advised the participants to use eggs from a woman other than the surrogate, because the birth mother will then be more likely to give up the baby.”

“A lot of time and attention was spent on the topic of conceiving as healthy a child as possible. Gender selection is included in this “service”. My consternation was huge when a fertility doctor asked the audience who would chose to abort a child with a defect. Most hands went in the air. Just for the record: abortion can also be enforced by contract.”

“Only twice (and very briefly) were the right of the child to knowledge of his or her ancestry and identity mentioned. But these were immediately countered by economic and practical arguments.”

Not in favour of culture venturing into this territory? Better ensure we don’t get on this train.

Read the rest here.

4 Responses to “ Redefining Marriage Against Woman And Child ”

  1. […] to how the denial of biology leads to the a violation of the rights of mothers and children, please be aware of yet another example of this in the real world: As always, this comes at the […]

  2. […] handled and shared with conviction. It matters to children, it matters to freedoms, it matters to women, it matters to speech, it matters to equality, it matters to the course of human history and it […]

  3. […] Children, women and the rights of parents will also be deeply affected by any redefinition of marriage. These were not addressed in her article. Any properly considered vote needs to. […]

  4. […] shortsighted often accuse others of scaremongering. This has been said of joining the dots between redefining marriage and the future effects on women and children. Just this morning, these dots were on the ABC’s Radio National Breakfast […]

Join the conversation