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: unkus

Some former Santorum supporters can’t help themselves.


151 posted on 05/04/2012 6:19:20 PM PDT by newzjunkey (I advocate separation of school and sport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Surrogacy is just another example of our tendency to treat the lives of others as commodities to serve our needs. Of course, a child born through surrogacy is a precious gift from God, but that does not make the circumstances of his or her conception morally acceptable—no more than it is acceptable for children to be conceived in one-night stands or even rapes. In those cases too, what is at issue is not the worth of the child but the bad behavior of one or more of the child’s parents.


152 posted on 05/04/2012 6:39:47 PM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: madprof98
On Facebook, Tagg gave even more details about the birth, confirming that the twins are his biological children.

How about hers? Was it her egg or surrogate's?

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.

Sounds like they themselves had 3 biological girls. I get the idea that boys are more important to Mormons...thus the attempt to have 3 boys via surrogate.

153 posted on 05/04/2012 6:44:04 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PoolQue
Speaking as a Mormon

Since you are Mormon, can you answer this question?

Do Mormons place more importance on having boys over girls?

Second question...there is something in Mormon theology about overseeing your own world after death. I'm wondering if this could be why Mormons like Romney's son wanted/needed to have boys...to be able to run these types of worlds?

Forgive me if this sounds stupid, but I have heard of this theology and am looking for more clarity. Thanks in advance for your reply.

154 posted on 05/04/2012 6:54:35 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Grams A

As most of us who have or have had teenage children, who have a motto of “won’t happen to me because I’m invincible” know parents can try to instill in them conservative values but there comes a time when they will make choices on their own and sometimes these aren’t the best ones. To say that Sarah Palin can no longer speak about family values because her daughter had a child out of wedlock is absolutely ridiculous. Jesus is the only one I know of who assumed responsibility for the sins of the entire world.

She turned her really bad decision into a positive platform by choosing not to abort, working to support her child, acknowledged her poor choice and speaks openly against teenage pregnancy-all things for which I applaud her. All children disappoint their parents at some time or another. Fortunately for almost all of them, their mother is not running for Vice President.

Unkus - obviously it makes you feel a lot better to be able to call people “pious jerks”. Sad for you!


I agree with you.

But I still don’t like pious jerks.


155 posted on 05/04/2012 7:00:37 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: SuzyQue

Thanks, SuzyQue!


156 posted on 05/04/2012 7:02:13 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
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!

There was no "truce" called on Mormon and surrogate bashing.

157 posted on 05/04/2012 7:05:39 PM PDT by ladyvet ( I would rather have Incitatus then the asses that are in congress today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: WILLIALAL

“Unnatural babies. What does that even mean? What kind of judgement is that? “

It is a “judgement” on the “parents”(donors). The babies born out of this evil, unnatural process, are just fine in my book. The process is the problem.

“A couple wanting children to the extent that they would go through all this trouble and expense are to be denigrated?”

Yes, they should be ashamed of their selfishness and total disregard for the natural ways.

“What ever happened to judge not lest you be judged?
Does Christ consider them “unnatural babies”?’

Christ even saved a murderer. Read your Bible. Babies born out of unnatural processes are fine.


158 posted on 05/04/2012 7:43:25 PM PDT by sagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

Why would you think the sperm were artificially inseminated? Couldn’t the biological mom be a surrogate for Tagg’s wife even if she was inseminated the regular way? I am really clueless here. Lol


159 posted on 05/04/2012 8:39:01 PM PDT by petitfour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: petitfour

I’m pretty sure his wife wouldn’t appreciate it if she was inseminated in the regular way. :-)


160 posted on 05/04/2012 8:57:23 PM PDT by SandyInSeattle (Running in circles and screaming is not a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Reagan69

Well, the problem lies in how many were aborted in this process? . IVF has problems and it is not pro-life.


161 posted on 05/04/2012 9:18:21 PM PDT by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SuzyQue

I missed everybody’s point!

Well, those ain’t no traditional values, LOL.


162 posted on 05/04/2012 9:18:58 PM PDT by donna (Mitt? NEVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

“Concubinage”?

I feel this thread has entered the dark ages... in more ways than one.


163 posted on 05/04/2012 9:20:43 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

Your argument that a surrogate may abort makes no sense and only adds hysteria to the discussion.


164 posted on 05/04/2012 9:24:02 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Your explanation might make sense in a perfect world... but we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a fallen one. Where disease and illness can strike anyone. And so when an infertile husband and wife turn to modern science to give them the child they desire, who are you to tell them that God says they shouldn’t have a child? I believe that God decides, not us.


165 posted on 05/04/2012 9:32:55 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Your explanation might make sense in a perfect world... but we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a fallen one. Where disease and illness can strike anyone. And so when an infertile husband and wife turn to modern science to give them the child they desire, who are you to tell them that God says they shouldn’t have a child? I believe that God decides, not us.


166 posted on 05/04/2012 9:34:37 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

They are nothing wrong with IFV if people cant have kids on their own. Like someone said you wouldn’t turn down someone else organ if you life or family members life depended on it. Alot of people are sounding awfully backward and stupid here. Zealotry with shades of Galileo redux. AKA blind ignorance.


167 posted on 05/05/2012 12:34:12 AM PDT by MARKUSPRIME
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
The word "concubinage" is not from the dark ages, it's way older than that, it's ancient. Because it describes a practice that's ancient: engaging a woman other than your wife so you can have more offspring.

It's not the word that's troubling, it's the practice that's troubling.

In our culture, which used to be a Christian culture (intil rather recently) it was understood that childbearing was supposed to be within marriage. Regrettably we fail in various ways, out-of-wedlock childen and so forth, but again (until recently) that was seen as something that fell short of the way it's supposed to be. It was not something you would set up to produce deliberately.

But we're more into perversity and "celebrate diversity" now, even on supposedly conservative websaites. A man and two women, two gay guys and a surrogate, two lesbians and their lab tech, hyperovulating your sister-in-law to get human raw materials, acquiring embryos as unconsenting human experimental subjects, generating dozens of half-siblings through insemination --- why not?

It's the premise of gay marriage: Screw "natural". We want what we want, when and how we want it.

168 posted on 05/05/2012 3:24:26 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
God has already designed us for procreation: husband and wife sare designed to have a one-flesh union, and thus increase and multiply. It's not just written in Scripture, it's written in your own flesh: the design that the Designer gave us.

Infertility means you've got some sort of disease or injury or malformity that makes you unable to have childen through normal intercourse, and it should be addressed by the medical profession with the ethical goal of curing the disease, healing the injury, repairing whatever is getting in the way of naural fertile sex.

Surrogacy does not cure infertility: Mr. and Mrs. Romney are still apparently inable to have children through normal intercourse.The morally upright thing to do, is to seek medical help to cure their infertility. There are effective drugs, devices, and surgery which can often address that problem, and restore their healthy sexual function.

Nobody's against actual CURATIVE medical inervention.

What's wrong is going outside your marriage to impregnate another woman.

169 posted on 05/05/2012 3:37:14 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
"I believe that God decides, not us." That's exactly my point. I don' see where God is OKing the begetting of children with someone other than your wife. Yes, children are begotten outside of marriage all the time. HALF of the children (all races) in the United States who are born to women under 30, are born out of wedlock. It's common. It's the "new norm." That doesn't make it right.
170 posted on 05/05/2012 3:41:43 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Thank you, Mrs. Don-o. Excellent explanation.


171 posted on 05/05/2012 6:32:48 AM 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 150 | View Replies]

To: madprof98
Well that does it!

Now I know I'm either gonna vote for Obama or not even bother to vote at all!

(sarcasm - duh!)

172 posted on 05/05/2012 6:41:49 AM PDT by airborne (Paratroopers! Good to the last drop!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MARKUSPRIME
Alot of people are sounding awfully backward and stupid here. Zealotry with shades of Galileo redux. AKA blind ignorance.

A similar line of . . . "argument" . . . has come up repeatedly on this very long thread. It's what passes for thinking among today's liberals--that is, "You are ignorant and mean, and I am offended. Case closed." For the liberals and others--even self-described conservatives--who follow their lead, something is closed, all right. I'm beginning to understand how the upcoming election has come down to Obama v. Romney.

173 posted on 05/05/2012 9:44:15 AM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: MARKUSPRIME

“Zealotry with shades of Galileo redux. AKA blind ignorance.”

I’m getting that impression, too.


174 posted on 05/05/2012 11:06:33 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: ladyvet
There was no "truce" called on Mormon and surrogate bashing.

I don't get the whole "mormon bashing" thing. I really don't. Growing up in the suburbs of Denver, I've always had Mormon neighbors, classmates and co-workers. Granted, I don't know all the ins and outs of their religion except that they avoid alcohol caffeine and tobacco, I've always found them to be decent, hard-working, politically conservative people who are trying to raise their kids right. I even went to prom with a Mormon girl, who, like the rest of us was enjoying a wild streak as a teenager (that her parents blamed on me! LOL! If they only knew...).

175 posted on 05/05/2012 11:07:08 AM PDT by Drew68 (I WILL vote to defeat Barack Hussein Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I already stated in another response that using modern reproductive technology to produce children for homosexual/lesbian couples is wrong because it denies children the right to be raised by a mother AND a father.

However, that does not negate the benefit that modern reproductive technology is for married heterosexual couples who for whatever reason cannot have children the typical way (notice I did not say natural) :)


176 posted on 05/05/2012 11:10:10 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Um, yeah- surrogacy DOES cure infertility! An infertile couple now has two beautiful children! God bless them.


177 posted on 05/05/2012 11:11:37 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

“I don’ see where God is OKing the begetting of children with someone other than your wife. “

We don’t whether the twins were conceived using his sperm and her egg. That would mean that the children were “begotten” with his own wife, her uterus just couldn’t gestate them.

And even if it wasn’t his sperm/her egg, it doesn’t matter.

Women having children without having the father involved in the child’s life is wrong. But that doesn’t negate the benefit of modern reproductive technology for married infertile couples.


178 posted on 05/05/2012 11:16:16 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
And so when an infertile husband and wife turn to modern science to give them the child they desire, who are you to tell them that God says they shouldn’t have a child? I believe that God decides, not us.

LOL, I suppose it's entirely possible that God DID tell the "infertile" couple that they shouldn't have a child.

It seems more that people like you are the ones saying they should.

179 posted on 05/05/2012 11:20:55 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
I associate insipid emoting with blind ignorance, and liberals.

Petulant children whining "but why CAN'T I have (whatever it is I imagine I "deserve")...??!!"

180 posted on 05/05/2012 11:25:01 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass; Reddy
It seems more that people like you are the ones saying they should.

And your demigod of "modern science."

181 posted on 05/05/2012 11:26:50 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

Yes, just as God told the person with diabetes to not use insulin, the person with angina to not have an angioplasty, and the person with COPD to not use oxygen!! They should live with it!

Sheesh.


182 posted on 05/05/2012 11:48:24 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

“And your demigod of “modern science.”

Get back to me when you need that medication or procedure.

:/


183 posted on 05/05/2012 11:50:11 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Drew68; ladyvet
I don't get the whole "mormon bashing" thing. I really don't.

There are some people that seethe with rage simply because Mormons call themselves Christians. That is what all this bashing we've been seeing so much of is really about. It is absolutely true that many Christians don't view Mormons as fellow Christians, but the vast majority don't get whipped up into a frenzy about it. If we're not Mormon we just think they are a different religion or maybe a bit misguided, but find no reason to hate on them. But for a very vocal and bitter few, the fact that LDS folks call themselves Christians is reason enough to spend all their time on an angry rampage.

I am not Mormon but I have no reason at all to personally dislike them. Virtually all the Mormons I've met have been very decent, family oriented people. Religion doesn't really factor in to how I vote. I will vote for the most politically conservative choice on the ballot (that CAN actually win), regardless of whether that candidate is an evangelical, a Mormon, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.

184 posted on 05/05/2012 12:36:46 PM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969; Drew68
I'm not Mormon either. Many of my neighbors and friends are Mormon. The hate and mad dog frothing at the mouth I've seen on this site by many against them is shocking and appalling.Romney wasn't my first choice but living in a swing state I will be voting for him.
185 posted on 05/05/2012 12:53:06 PM PDT by ladyvet ( I would rather have Incitatus then the asses that are in congress today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

Nice strawman. You argue like a liberal.


186 posted on 05/05/2012 1:01:25 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
I won't need any fertilized eggs implanted, nor will my wife.

I would hope, as much as you want to win this argument, that you would agree with the truism that just because you CAN do something, doesn't always mean you should.

We Catholics believe this is one thing you shouldn't.

You call that ignorant zealotry. OK, I get it.

187 posted on 05/05/2012 1:04:38 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

I didn’t call your belief against surrogacy ignorant zealotry. To be a Catholic means that you abide by Catholic tenets. I respect that.

I equate modern reproductive technology with modern medical technology. You (and others on this thread) do not. The danger lies in that some people might use that opinion to try to have reproductive technology outlawed. IMO, that would be equivalent to outlawing the use of blood transfusions because the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe it’s against God’s will to use them.


188 posted on 05/05/2012 1:15:38 PM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
I equate modern reproductive technology with modern medical technology. You (and others on this thread) do not.

That doesn't even make sense. To set you straight, I have no problem equating "modern reproductive technology with modern medical technology." What I do not do is automatically assume employment of modern technology of any kind results in a morally-positive outcome.

And while it's true that as a Catholic I am opposed to IVF (while understanding many other Christians are not), that's not even what we are talking about here. We are talking about surrogacy in creating new human life.

You seem to be conflating this very specific objection to this one use of "modern medical technolgy" with the use of "modern medical technology," generally.

I wish you would stop.

189 posted on 05/05/2012 1:46:48 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass; Reddy

And just so I know where you’re coming from, do you believe people should be allowed to sell their own organs?


190 posted on 05/05/2012 1:49:01 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: ladyvet; Longbow1969; Drew68

Morman bashing is the new black here, babies are now an accessory.


191 posted on 05/05/2012 2:16:46 PM PDT by fml
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Reddy
The danger lies in that some people might use that opinion to try to have reproductive technology outlawed.

Surrogacy is illegal in such religion-ridden backwaters as Japan, France, and . . . Sweden! And renting a womb is NOT an example of "modern technology." Rich people did stuff like that way long ago.

192 posted on 05/05/2012 3:14:30 PM PDT by madprof98 ("moritur et ridet" - salvianus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

This thread has been up for 24 hours. It’s apparent that you really have no problem with it or any of the number of threads that have been posted bashing Mormons. “Leave the kids out of it” was the rule when St.Sarah was running. I can’t even imagine six more months of it. So I bid your site…”well…bye”. The out of control bigotry alone, not to mention the other issues this site has...is more then enough reason to leave.


193 posted on 05/05/2012 4:56:11 PM PDT by ladyvet ( I would rather have Incitatus then the asses that are in congress today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: ladyvet

Yep Lady its pretty sickening and yes very ignorant. These small minded zealots slagging kids for their distorted venomous world view. Now all we need is the imbecile and resident dumbass presently no screen name to show up and foam at the mouth then its par for the coarse, oh and we also need the folks that spam mindnumbing chart after chart against ABO while professing purity and damning other to hell.

What a joke, you folks should be ashamed of yourselves. We got people openly supporting Obama on FR now so nothing surprises me anymore. My how far this place has fallen and its because those exact people. Getting sick of it as well. Waiting for someone to tell me “well bye” as well I guess. Sucks that its come to this.


194 posted on 05/05/2012 5:09:39 PM PDT by MARKUSPRIME
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: MARKUSPRIME

Well stated. I mostly just lurk now, but I hardly recognize FR anymore. There used to be a number of great, well informed educated posters on here. Now its a bunch of nutjobs and “cranks” as someone put it. Have fun voting for Virgil Goode guys and tipping VA to Obama, you will really prove something I guess.

IVF= murder. I have heard it all now! Nutjobs.....


195 posted on 05/05/2012 7:24:19 PM PDT by LongsforReagan (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

Some of the responses on this thread turn my stomach. Some couples desperately want children but the wife miscarries and cannot carry a baby to term. No wonder when I direct some people to FR they tell me they came here and it looks like a bunch of crazies. Maybe they ran across a thread like this.


196 posted on 05/05/2012 9:30:00 PM PDT by mojitojoe (American by birth. Southern by the grace of God. Conservative by reason and logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna

Tough! Sometimes it is the only way for a couple to have their own biological child.


197 posted on 05/05/2012 9:31:15 PM PDT by mojitojoe (American by birth. Southern by the grace of God. Conservative by reason and logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

You have a twisted mind.


198 posted on 05/05/2012 9:33:59 PM PDT by mojitojoe (American by birth. Southern by the grace of God. Conservative by reason and logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

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!
________________________________
No, it’s not, seriously WTF is going on here?


199 posted on 05/05/2012 9:38:23 PM PDT by mojitojoe (American by birth. Southern by the grace of God. Conservative by reason and logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: MARKUSPRIME

We got people openly supporting Obama on FR
____________________________
If I see anymore libs on here promoting that POS Marxists, I’m out of here.


200 posted on 05/05/2012 9:41:17 PM PDT by mojitojoe (American by birth. Southern by the grace of God. Conservative by reason and logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | 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