Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Romney’s Eldest Son Has Twins Via Surrogate
ABC News ^ | May 4, 2012 | Emily Friendman

Posted on 05/04/2012 2:07:33 PM PDT by madprof98

O’HARA, Pa. – Tagg Romney, the eldest son of presidential candidate Mitt Romney, announced via Twitter that he and his wife Jen have new twin boys, delivered by a surrogate today.

“Happy 2 announce birth of twin boys David Mitt and William Ryder. Big thanks to our surrogate. Life is a miracle,” Tagg tweeting, linking to a photo of himself and one of his new sons.

This the second time that Tagg, 42, and his wife, Jen,39, have used a surrogate. The same surrogate was used for the twins carried their youngest son Jonathan, who was born in August of 2010. Their other three children were not born via surrogacy.

(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: ivf; liberalsonparade; moralabsolutes; romney; surrogate; taggromney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-212 next last
To: Reddy

Heart transplants and organ donations canot be be equated morally with reproductive concubinage. The “modern” “technical” aspect of surrogacy is not what makes it objectionable. It’s the depersonalization and demaritalization of reproduction -— distorting procreation into being both a comemrcial transaction and a laboratory breeding technique -— that makes it objectionable.


101 posted on 05/04/2012 3:58:56 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (De veras.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: trisham

Should we not donate blood and organs because the recipient’s body rejects it, because it is for all intents and purposes, unnatural in the recipient’s body?

Maybe skydiving should be banned because there’s a chance of the plane or parachute failing. Because you know, just because we can jump out of perfectly good airplanes, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea and all...


102 posted on 05/04/2012 3:59:21 PM PDT by wastedyears (There can be only one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Peace be with you. I am not your enemy.


103 posted on 05/04/2012 4:01:40 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna
well I guess I bought my adopted son as well...as we made a hefty donation to the agency...

we thought we were helping with the expenses..nothing is FREE unless you sign up for Obama’s welfare plans..

I have friend who used surrogate as well and I never once consider them ‘bought’
I also donate to DVA and Paralyzed Veterans..guess I buy them as well...

what ever...your opinion

104 posted on 05/04/2012 4:02:12 PM PDT by haircutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

Hey... oldest one of ten .... mother was the oldest one of ten.... she had six sisters....... tell me about having more than one mother...... sheeesh.
Come to think of it there where at least a dozen great aunts also.


105 posted on 05/04/2012 4:02:37 PM PDT by W. W. SMITH (Maybe the horse will learn to sing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

The legalization of any procedure or product has to be weighed against both the good it does and the harm it does. I believe another problem with artificial insemination is that extra embryos are created that become frozen or destroyed. This is where the aspect of the cheapening of human life comes into the discussion. Adoption is still a great option that not only helps the parents but an existing unwanted child.


106 posted on 05/04/2012 4:03:07 PM PDT by JediJones (From the makers of Romney, Bloomberg/Schwarzenegger 2016. Because the GOP can never go too far left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: kevcol

Didn’t take long for someone to nail the ‘surrogates’ connection!


107 posted on 05/04/2012 4:05:10 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

Maybe they decided to use only two eggs, and they were both fertilized.


108 posted on 05/04/2012 4:09:57 PM PDT by wastedyears (There can be only one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: EEGator
No, there's no hate being spewed. Everybody here KNOWS that to get a viable fertilized egg implanted in the woman's uterus it is likely the Romney kid used the method that creates plenty of otherwise viable fertilized eggs that just get tossed out with the day's garbage.

Now where did he learn those values?

I think it's perfectly fair to examine the parents when it comes to their chillun's belief systems.

It's like Mayor d'Alessandro in Baltimore, a regular old Siciliano Protectore, and he raised his daughter Nancy Pelosi to have what can most charitably be called MOB ETHICS.

Not that there's anything wrong with that ~ in some ways the MOB has the right idea ~ like with loyalty, stealing from within, that sort of thing, but going after the grandfather is one of those opportunity things.

If they want to do this stuff do it when we aren't watching them. Else be prepared for the criticism.

109 posted on 05/04/2012 4:10:07 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

“The “modern” “technical” aspect of surrogacy is not what makes it objectionable. It’s the depersonalization and demaritalization of reproduction -— distorting procreation into being both a comemrcial transaction and a laboratory breeding technique “

But couldn’t that opinion be equally applied to heart transplants?? Placing another person’s heart into a patient could be considered distorting the Creator’s masterpiece! And heart transplants aren’t free, are they??


110 posted on 05/04/2012 4:11:33 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
Old Church of the First Born (not that 19th century invention in Sweden) have a fertility problem and they pass the women around through what is known technically as serial polygamy to give them all a chance at a proven man.

Sometimes they get confused for Jack Mormons but they have a perfectly good base of Christian belief in their Lutheran and Orthodox backgrounds.

111 posted on 05/04/2012 4:14:46 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Reagan69

Mary did the same thing. Totally.


112 posted on 05/04/2012 4:16:31 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Considering they’ve done this twice and had twins both times, the odds are astronomically in favor of them using IVF. Now, who will ask Mitt Romney what happened to all his other preborn grandchildren that were concieved by these procedures? Are they sitting in a freezer somewhere? In a plastic bag in a biohazard dump? Being used for stem cell harvesting? Inquiring minds might like to know.


113 posted on 05/04/2012 4:17:24 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

“Next, you’ll be saying that only children conceived using the missionary position should be allowed to live. Sheesh.”

That’s ridiculous. There are a great many pro-lifers who are opposed to IVF, because the procedure results in a great many more DEATHS of human beings than lives. This includes the Catholic Church. The opposition has nothing to do with wanting children to die, in fact it is the opposite.


114 posted on 05/04/2012 4:20:10 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

“If you found out your wife couldn’t carry a child to term, would you divorce her and claim her to be unnatural?”

No, why would I divorce her? Just because she can’t carry a child? There are numerous NATURAL reasons why a female cannot carry a child. Next question.

“You’re a disgusting person. If I was JimRob, I’d banhammer you immediately.”

I am a disgusting person because I don’t believe in rented-wombs, wealth and power influencing social ills? Ban me all you want.


115 posted on 05/04/2012 4:21:01 PM PDT by sagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: madprof98; All

Congratulations and best wishes for the Romney family.


116 posted on 05/04/2012 4:21:01 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan69

“It’s her egg and his sperm. What’s the problem.”

The problem is that IVF is essentially a mass abortion that also happens to result in a few babies surviving sometimes. If that’s alright with you, then we are not on the same page.


117 posted on 05/04/2012 4:22:35 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sagar

Evil and twisted. Sending people to jail.

Dear Lord....way out...way out.

you’re not impressing a soul with your piousness.

You appear to be a bit of a nut.


118 posted on 05/04/2012 4:24:06 PM PDT by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: trisham

Nice and thanks for taking the trouble.

The person to whom you are trying to enlighten....lost cause.

The sort that makes FreeRepublic look like a bunch of backwoods dolts.


119 posted on 05/04/2012 4:26:58 PM PDT by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

“How did you make the leap from surrogate mothers to fetal stem cell research?

One option creates life, the other extinguishes it.”

Wrong. We are talking a surrogate using IVF. So the correct comparison is:

One option (abortion) extinguishes life, the other option (IVF) extinguishes many lives, but might create one or a few lives also.

Now maybe you can understand the moral revulsion this provokes in some of us.


120 posted on 05/04/2012 4:28:20 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Fishtalk

I can’t understand any of this either.


121 posted on 05/04/2012 4:29:21 PM PDT by wastedyears (There can be only one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: haircutter
"the new Romney kids will have a great life..I’m thrilled for them."

Aside from the fact that Grandpa is a pod person....

122 posted on 05/04/2012 4:30:26 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

” Their other three children were not born via surrogacy.”

Can’t you read?

.


123 posted on 05/04/2012 4:30:38 PM PDT by Mears (Alcohol. Tobacco. Firearms. What's not to like?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

“There are no unwanted children, just un-found families”- National Adoption Foundation

Embryos can also be donated to couples who desire children.


124 posted on 05/04/2012 4:35:50 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

I can understand the pause we all get at the notion of having a baby conceived by and carried to term by a surrogate. It’s not “normal” but the genes in that sperm and egg are carried on by those living children and are as genetically related to the Romneys as their first 3 children are.

It’s not evil and it’s not bad.

Now for sure I do not think that anybody should make the wonderful and perfect non-judgemental Sager have a child by in vitro fertilization, but I should think that he is way out of line in calling for the jailing of people and calling them evil for doing what their conscience deems correct.

Again, he makes us Freepers look like hairy neanderthals.


125 posted on 05/04/2012 4:40:03 PM PDT by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

“There are a great many pro-lifers who are opposed to IVF, because the procedure results in a great many more DEATHS of human beings than lives.”

I am pro-life, and believe life begins at conception. Ten to 20% of known pregnancies end in miscarriage, the actual number of miscarriages is unknown (thought to be up to 50%) because many pregnancies fail before the mother even knows she is pregnant. If that is the case, should we ban all conceptions because of the deaths that occur?

Some women donate embryos created through IVF for research which is wrong. But proclaiming modern fertility treatments as immoral based on that is wrong.


126 posted on 05/04/2012 4:46:29 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: sagar

“So, they did it just to create unnatural babies. Everything is wrong with that.”

Unnatural babies. What does that even mean? What kind of judgement is that? A couple wanting children to the extent that they would go through all this trouble and expense are to be denigrated? What ever happened to judge not lest you be judged?
Does Christ consider them “unnatural babies”?


127 posted on 05/04/2012 4:50:24 PM PDT by WILLIALAL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

I have grown children

They do things that I may disagree with

Does that reflect on my values??


128 posted on 05/04/2012 4:54:16 PM PDT by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fishtalk
You sound rather intolerant yourself, but that's just your way.

Are you sure you're on the right board?

129 posted on 05/04/2012 4:55:18 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: trisham

I am a Christian, but I am not Catholic. I believe that God opens and closes the womb, so no amount of IVF will result in a pregnancy unless God ordains it. I also know that children are a blessing from God (Psalm 127:3). And I believe that you can still respect human life and uphold the dignity of procreation while undergoing infertility treatments.


130 posted on 05/04/2012 4:55:40 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna

“Those children have two mothers! The genetic mother, and the mother who carried them for nine months.”

And so do all adopted children.


131 posted on 05/04/2012 4:57:34 PM PDT by WILLIALAL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna

“It is not a gift, they bought children”

So I bought my adopted daughter? $30,000. These terms being thrown out at random without being thought through.


132 posted on 05/04/2012 5:00:50 PM PDT by WILLIALAL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: EEGator
Two children are born, and most here are spewing hate...lovely.

Welcome to the "new and improved" Free Republic! See, we've kicked off or chased away all the rational, intelligent posters that used to contribute to this place and retained all the unhinged cranks!

Ain't it great!

133 posted on 05/04/2012 5:04:19 PM PDT by Drew68 (I WILL vote to defeat Barack Hussein Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Heh.

The other poster says that the medical people implanting those embryos should go to jail.

He called the Romneys evil.

You don’t think that’s a bit much?

Instead you cast aspersions on me?

Don’t bother to respond, I’ve made my case, you may have the last word.


134 posted on 05/04/2012 5:07:09 PM PDT by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Fishtalk

You have your moral code. Learn to live with it. Don’t get so high and mighty when you get criticized for it.


135 posted on 05/04/2012 5:13:47 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
You sound a bit unhinged yourself. Look, just like I told your buddy, it's your moral code so you learn to live with it. Trying to mop the floor with folks who don't agree with you on what is a life and death issue is hardly gentlemanly or lady like ~ more like unhinged fascist BS if you ask me.

Put a cap on that bottle before it bites you.

136 posted on 05/04/2012 5:15:57 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
. . . to deny them the use of modern technology is archaic and mean . . .

A paid surrogate is not an example of "modern technology." A paid surrogate is a human being who is commissioned to bear a child that is not her own--or to abort that child if she prefers since she really has no investment in the new baby's life except the fee she receives for her trouble.

137 posted on 05/04/2012 5:17:25 PM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: KosmicKitty

Nancy Pelosi is a fine representative of the way of life and the moral code preached by her father ~


138 posted on 05/04/2012 5:17:38 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

The latest in “outsourcing”...


139 posted on 05/04/2012 5:19:35 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You have your moral code. Learn to live with it. Don’t get so high and mighty when you get criticized for it.

Your last word, let me repeat it for you.

Have a nice night.

140 posted on 05/04/2012 5:19:50 PM PDT by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: madprof98; Reddy
The technology is not all that advanced and modern ~ we still don't have the capability to build babies apart from the mother's body. Once we reach that point we can refer to it as a mature technology.

Currently it's a bit brutal, and ethically questionable ~ in many circles.

141 posted on 05/04/2012 5:20:15 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: madprof98
Has Twins Via Surrogate

Isn't that essentially the point for watching porn movies? ... Never mind...

142 posted on 05/04/2012 5:21:29 PM PDT by King Moonracer (Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

“I am guessing too much polygamist Mormon inbreeding is keeping them from having a child naturally.”

Not to defend surrogacy, because I don’t approve of it, but this piece does state that they had 3 children NOT via surrogate.

Which is how it says it, which sound a little odd, but presumably it means they had them the old fashioned way.


143 posted on 05/04/2012 5:22:19 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

“I think John and Elizabeth Edwards might have avoided a lot of very ugly publicity if they had just claimed that Johnny’s last child was born by a “surrogate” for them.”

Well, that would have required John telling Elizabeth about the child and therefore the affair, and it seems like that was what he tried hardest to avoid.

It would also have required Hunter to give up her child and I don’t see why she would have been willing to do that.


144 posted on 05/04/2012 5:28:51 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Grams A; unkus

Grams, you made my point better than I did. I agree with most of what you said, except for the last sentence.


145 posted on 05/04/2012 5:35:50 PM PDT by SuzyQue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: madprof98
This the second time that Tagg, 42, and his wife, Jen,39, have used a surrogate.

The actual article referenced in FR has nothing about just why the parents decided to use a surrogate.

There is no information on the procedure to produce biological children out of a surrogate mother. That leaves fundamental questions unanswered. I guess that it is more convenient.

146 posted on 05/04/2012 5:36:55 PM PDT by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna

Maybe you missed my point.


147 posted on 05/04/2012 5:39:13 PM PDT by SuzyQue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: WILLIALAL

‘’Those children have two mothers! The genetic mother, and the mother who carried them for nine months.’”

“And so do all adopted children.”

Typically with adopted children those are the same woman. They then have an adoptive mother.


148 posted on 05/04/2012 5:40:51 PM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I see nothing in the article that says she had IVF. It says that Romney is the father, nothing about the mother, so I’m thinking she was artificially inseminated.

The article just doesn’t say.


149 posted on 05/04/2012 6:03:59 PM PDT by SandyInSeattle (Running in circles and screaming is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Reddy; madprof98
Surrogacy is like an organ transplant? Reddy, I understand where you're coming from (I think) but bear with me, I’m going to try to explain:

(Madprof, you want to listen in? Or add your thoughts?)

Almost any bodily organ (heart, kidney, lung) is part of a system whose function is that it keeps a person alive. It’s about survival. And if you can donate a kidney, or blood, or something under ethical conditions (not selling organs, not having an organ confiscated by some Organ Committee, but free gift) to help somebody else survive, well and good.

But the sexual organs have not a personal survival, but a maritally interpersonal meaning. For two reasons: they mean "you and I belong to each other (maritally) in an exclusive manner; and they can generate a new person, which gives sexuality an even deeper interpersonal meaning.

This isn't true of animals. That's why veterinary processes (insemination, cloning, interspecies breeding --- like making mules --- or any other laboratory reproduction technique) are not "depersonalizing" for animals. Not at all. But they would be for humans. It has to do with our identity, which is important to us. Animals don't have an intense “personal” interest in their "identity" or their "relationships" or a transcendent drive to ask “Who am I? Where did I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going?” or any sense of personal violation. They aren't personally violated no matter how they are bred with each other. They don’t give a flip who their mama is or who their daddy is.

It's quite otherwise with humans. One of the main immoral aspects of slavery, for instance, is that it fractured interpersonal relations, separated husbands from wives, separated children from parents, treated persons as if they were some kind of livestock. It broke natural marriage (husband – wife) and natural parenthood (father–child and mother–child) to pieces.

OK. Here’s the bottom line: Hiring a woman to be a surrogate is that sort of wrongdoing. It treats her not as a whole person, but as a rented uterus. It’s as depersonalizing as just renting her vagina (prostitution); it intentionally thing-ifies her so that she is to have no ongoing relation to the child or children she bears; and it makes human procreation a for-hire contract rather than a love til-death-do-you-part two-in-one-flesh union.

Human procreation is an image of God. It is life-giving and love-giving at the same time, and it creates another image of God, a new human. Surrogacy make the child-bearer less than a mother, makes her as hired procreative collaborator less than a wife, and makes the child the end-result of a kind of manufacture, as if he were a product, less than a person.

I'm not saying this detracts from the worth of the child: eery child has a right to life. God bless the child, the children: God belss them forever. I am saying that the child will lack something basic that any child would want and have a natural right to: to be the child of the woman who gave him birth, the fruit of the love-union of his father and mother. He is being deliberately deprived of that.

150 posted on 05/04/2012 6:13:37 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-212 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson