Posted on 06/12/2010 6:56:37 AM PDT by GonzoII
This kind of selfishness is so destructive — you have to have been raised by an unstable, narcissiscitic mother incapable of a relationship with a man to know what it’s like.
That's the entire point. It's just as immoral to donate sperm for anonymous donation as it is for the mother to exclude a true father from a child.
Instruction on respect for human life - Donum Vitae
Catechism of the Catholic Church
2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child's right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses' "right to become a father and a mother only through each other."
2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that "entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children." "Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses' union . . . . Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person." 2378 A child is not something owed to one, but is a gift. The "supreme gift of marriage" is a human person. A child may not be considered a piece of property, an idea to which an alleged "right to a child" would lead. In this area, only the child possesses genuine rights: the right "to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents," and "the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception."170 2379 The Gospel shows that physical sterility is not an absolute evil. Spouses who still suffer from infertility after exhausting legitimate medical procedures should unite themselves with the Lord's Cross, the source of all spiritual fecundity. They can give expression to their generosity by adopting abandoned children or performing demanding services for others.
In case of women who are not married they may be denying a father but deliberate? Many men have no sperm, that is the case with my husband and that is the reason we adopted. We might have had an AI child in 1963 but my husband has an adopted brother and sister so that was the natural way for us to go.
Adoptions are more open now, in the past you were told nothing about the birth parents, NOTHING.
Indeed! Thank you for reminding me of that universal truth.
It’s called the “who’s your daddy now” syndrome.
Sorry...
Much better than what I had.
And that was WRONG, because it is deceptive. It is one of the worst lies and once a child catches you in this, and they eventually do, they never trust anything else you say to them again. My entire family fabricated a preposterous story about my birth father (BTW, I am the 2nd immaculate conception ;-). Even as in my earliest childhood, I recognized the fallacy in their story. It wasn't until I turned 21 that a cousin told me the truth. When I adopted my daughter, I made certain she understood she was adopted from the earliest years. On the other hand, I chose not to have an open adoption as I believe that creates confusion. My daughter chose to meet her birth mother and then chose to come home to her family.
“I was conceived in moment of passion”
is much more romantic than
“Some guy jacked-off into a container and then sold his sperm to my mom”
You have misunderstood me. I told my 3 children at a very early age that they were adopted. They heard the word adopted long before they could understand what it meant, but they knew it was something good. It was information about birth parents that were not told to us, the adoptive parents. They came from a very respected adoption agency and we were told nothing about their birth parents and the birth parents were told nothing about us.
I suppose that unfavorable circumstances-of-conception could be rated on on a spectrum, with some that are egregiously bad while others are just somehow experienced as un-whole, fragmentary in some way.
Who could deny that some circumstances are troubling?Seduction, prostitution, trivial sex, vendor insemination, rape, incest, IVF: all of these may result in the conception of a child. Granted that such a child may be glad to be alive, yet they may also "take it to heart" that there was something out of kilter about the way their conception came about, or their missing relationship to their natural father.
Fatherhood is a big biggie. I guess it's almost radical to say that these days.
>> So! How is this any different from a quick hookup with a person you have never met before and may never see again?
Are you questioning the intent, morality, method, or outcome?
Each is not necessarily equivalent in both cases of donor and hookup.
>> is much more romantic than
That would be the method. See #52.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
This NYT author is putting his own agenda into the article. If you read the study he’s talking about, the children whose parents used donors are FAR more happy about it that he makes you think. http://familyscholars.org/assets/Donor_FINAL.pdf_
This is not surprising. How sad for them..
It doesn't matter whether the baby was due to an oopsie in the back seat, a violent rape, sex in the marital bed, sex in the office coffee room with your married boss, or IVF with donor sperm.
Who is going to slam a loving, married couple who have tried everything to have a baby and end up using a donor sperm or egg and finally becoming parents? With all the evil and abuse in the world, you are really going to condemn people who want more than anything in the world to be parents?
Those of you who think being infertile means you should never use technology to have a child should yourselves walk or ride a pony to your next cross-country business trip. "G-d would NEVER have wanted" you to use a jet airplane.
I wonder if these statistics are any different from adopted children? This is an interesting topic and one I really don’t understand, since I am the natural child of married parents and the mother of four — all born in wedlock and who grew up in an intact household, knowing their father.
Well said and absolutely right!
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.