Posted on 10/28/2005 6:07:22 PM PDT by neverdem
We can usually sympathize with one or another party to a dispute: one is usually more in the right—or less in the wrong—than the other. But with the breakdown of accepted conventions, it increasingly happens that neither side arouses our sympathies.
Take a recent case in Sweden, where a lesbian couple wished to have children. An understanding and liberal-minded male friend agreed to donate his sperm, and three children were born to one of the two women between 1992 and 1996. But then relations between the two women deteriorated, and they split up.
The mother of the children found herself alone and in difficult straits. Who would support her, in her—and her children’s—time of need? Her former lover was unwilling, because—after all—she was no relation of the children. The sperm donor had made it clear from the first that he had no wish to be a father in any but the most literal biological sense; he thought he was merely doing the couple a favor. He therefore felt no moral obligation to support the children, and his conscience was clear.
Nevertheless, the government’s department of social security—the potential surrogate parent of every child—sued to force the sperm donor to pay. After a case lasting four years, he found himself obliged henceforth to support the mother and children financially.
The president of the Swedish Federation for Sexual Equality declared the legal decision an outrage. “It is scandalous,” he said. “The man has been condemned to be a father even though he did not take the decision to have the children. Above all, one of the women who took part in that decision has been absolved of all responsibility. If one desires equality of rights for lesbians, it is anomalous that it should not be she who was obliged to support the children financially.”
It would take considerable space to elucidate all the errors in the president’s statement. But I think that the language of rights, and above all of equal rights, is what leads us into this sordid legal and moral swamp. If women have a “right” to children, in the sense that not having them if they want them is an infringement of their rights, then of course lesbian women can no longer accept childlessness as the natural consequence of their condition. Let it not be said that new medical technology is responsible for this change in attitude, incidentally: the kind of artificial insemination offered in a domestic setting by the sperm donor has been possible for a very long time. No, the culprit here is the idea that the fulfilment of our desires, no matter what our condition, is a right. As for the well-being of the children in this case—beyond the provision of sufficient financial support for them—that seems to have entered into no one’s thnking.
A plague on all their houses, then: the idea that one “condemns” a man to support children is in itself both revealing and chilling.
Freaks.
Perhaps if he had studied the Bible and understood about the sanctity of marriage and life, he wouldn't be in this (liberal) mess right now.
What gets my goat is they want to do that here in the US as well. Man, you think fathers have it bad here now (and they do) just wait till they try to pass that stuff off over here!
I support that decision. He enabled what I consider to be a tragic situation. He should pay for that with financial support. Perhaps others will learn, and perhaps fewer men will donate sperm so that lesbians can raise children. That would be a good thing.
It's not like he bought a one year subscription to Swedish Meatballs. He gave life to another person. He is the father no matter what his attitude.
As if that has never happened before.
I would say, not just lesbians, but any woman who intends deliberately to raise a fatherless child.
Handing out sperm with no thought to the consequences is both unwise and wrong, and men should stop it.
Very sad, even sadder for the children. May God help them!
How can the woman and her children be in "difficult straits" when Sweden is a socialist utopia?
Quite right. From my earliest days I have kept track of my emissions. And I have counseled others to do the same.
How interesting.
Coupled lesbians splitting up and outside sperm donors forced to pony up. Grrrreaaaat Country.
What a tribute to society and social "progress."
I agree.
LOL!
Perhaps women should cross their legs more often, as well.
Oh, I agree with that too, but it's not the point of this particular story.
Nice double entendre!
I totally support the Swedish government on this. Life, family, children, and responsibility are not games for queers to endlessly play with.
I hang around Lazamataz sometimes :-).
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.