Posted on 05/15/2015 5:12:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
Sofia Vergara is the Spanish-accented sexpot on the ABC sitcom "Modern Family." She's also now the center of an unwanted controversy over a "modern family." She's fighting with an ex-fiance over two frozen embryos.
Back in 2013, Vergara granted a TV interview to Dr. Oz to discuss her baby-making plans: "I've been very concerned about fertility and I wanted to take advantage of science, so I froze my huevos." She and her fiance Nick Loeb had no success with a surrogate mother on two embryos, and they made two more before the relationship soured.
The current controversy began when Loeb recently wrote an op-ed for The New York Times publicly asking for his test-tube children, with no expectation of joint custody or child support payments: "When we create embryos for the purpose of life, should we not define them as life, rather than as property?"
Were Loeb not the ex-fiance of one of Hollywood's hottest stars, it's hard to imagine the Times making any space for this pro-life argument. Aside from the Times, the media clearly took sides with the more famous half of this duel. The New York Post carried the coarse headline: "It's time for Nick Loeb to STFU about Sofia's eggs."
That ignores entirely the proposition that the father had anything to do with it.
Then the fight moved to television. Loeb was awarded interviews, but was pounded for daring to publicize this issue. NBC "Today" co-host Hoda Kotb told him he should quit: "You each signed an agreement saying neither of you would bring this embryo to term without the other's consent. I mean, it sort of seems like a dead issue at this point."
So why did the "Today" show invite him for an interview?
On CNN, "New Day" anchor Alisyn Camerota also took a prosecutorial stance. "Not everyone [translation: Alisyn Camerota] believes that embryos are lives. Why do you believe that you've already created a life?" She insisted that if he moved on to a new woman, he wouldn't care about these embryos. The pro-life argument must be a desperate con job.
Both anchors lectured Loeb that "there are people [read: both anchors] though, who question your motives, and who question what you're doing." That's an obvious question, but what about the woman's motives?
And what about the media's motives? What really brought this fight into the news was a two-faced media that claim to sympathize with Vergara, but really wanted to exploit her fame for TV ratings and Internet clicks.
These posing female anchors tried to shame the less-famous half of a celebrity couple as a disposable boy toy and attention hound. If the genders were reversed, you can bet liberals would cry sexism.
Feminism demands that the woman is always right -- especially about her career. Vergara has a 23-year-old son from a previous relationship and so it must seem shocking to her media fans that she would surrender to another cycle of parenthood at 42. Why should this one-trick superstar have to make any compromise in her white-hot career right now before it inevitably fades?
No one in the media takes the "ancient family" viewpoint on this mess. Embryos and surrogate mothers in this case weren't based on infertility, but on Vergara's refusal to carry a baby and complicate her hit TV show. Both sides of this mess should have realized that there is no room for "family" in this selfish squabble.
What’s she doing freezing embryos with her BOYFRIEND?!
>>>What’s she doing freezing embryos with her BOYFRIEND?!<<<
I assume you are upset about having children outside the covenant of marriage. That doesn’t hold water with most men and women of child bearing age.
Let me translate this back into Midwestern standard English for you.
She says: "I've been very concerned about fertility..."
What it means: "I've taken the wrong road of womanhood and fell for every liberal lie about life. Because of that I've not entered into a stable marriage, grown old to the very edge of natural fertility and then read an article in People magazine about it and suddenly realized my mistake."
She says: I wanted to take advantage of science, so I froze my huevos."
What it means: "I watched a show on Discovery channel and all my spinster friends were talking about it over lunch at Baco Mercat's (I had his signature Amergaz Picada baco, gluten-free of course). Plus, I'm not stupid and I understand hard things like science. Look, I know how to work the Keurig. Using the word 'huevos' makes me a legitimate Latina and therefore a double victim - woman and Latina - so don't judge me.
Feel free to ping me and I can translate all liberalism into MSE.
As an aside, is it just me or does she have the standard nose job?
I wouldn’t know. What I noticed is that her mouth is big
Creating and freezing embryos is a crime in itself, and it inevitably involves the murder of most or all of the babies.
There are at least 250.000 frozen babies in the U.S. right now. At least, that was the number about ten years ago. Most of them will eventually be murdered, because they have already been abandoned by their parents.
There is absolutely no commitment and no harm/foul in flitting out of boyfriend/girlfriend relationships which is not practical for having babies. It’s kinda a Jerry Springer show waiting to happen.
Hey Brent, they’re not huevos, they are fertilized eggs which means they are embryos. Not the same thing.
Only half of her DNA is represented in those embryos. Also, she didn’t do this alone. Her boyfriend participated. His is the other half of the DNA.
They are BOTH responsible for creating the embryos ... so it’s not a feminist thing ... it’s a shared immoral thing (imo) and a shared stupid legal thing which both people share in the making of.
Hey Brent, they’re not huevos, they are fertilized eggs which means they are embryos. Not the same thing.
Only half of her DNA is represented in those embryos. Also, she didn’t do this alone. Her boyfriend participated. His is the other half of the DNA.
They are BOTH responsible for creating the embryos ... so it’s not a feminist thing ... it’s a shared immoral thing (imo) and a shared stupid legal thing which both people share in the making of.
Which means they are embriones
Though I am impressed with her and her son in those Head and Shoulders commercials. A member of a minority group being a responsible mom, teaching her son the proper social graces, and encouraging him to seek GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT??
You just don’t see that on television anymore.
Please don’t bring common sense and morals into this. /S
Answer: she's making, abusing, and destroying human lives.
That she did something idiotic and incredibly shallow is an easier sell. I play to win.
I’m just glad they these people see the embryos as something precious to keep and not throw into the trash without a second though... married or not.
“Her boyfriend participated. His is the other half of the DNA.”
Since the embryo is in a test tube the woman’s “it’s my body argument” holds little water.
She shouldn’t have froze them, it’s unnatural and disgusting. When you’re too old to have kids, sorry that’s it.
I agree
I completely agree. There may not be an expiration date stamped on women per se, but nature makes it obvious.
She’s 42 going on 43...IN THEORY, she MIGHT, MIGHT be able to conceive, carry and successfully birth a fetus. But even then, the chance that the fetus has birth defects, like Downs Syndrome, is significant.
She had her only child at 18-19, the way nature intended.
And spare me the “I had 3 healthly kids at 40+ years old” stories. If true, consider yourself very blessed/lucky because it’s not normal to do so.
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.