Posted on 06/01/2006 6:55:41 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Note: This commentary may not be suitable for young children. Please use parental discretion.
Leann Mischel, a Pennsylvania college professor, was ready to have a second child. And she wanted the new baby to have the same father her son did. The problem was that Mischel had no idea who he was: The father of her son was Donor 401 at a sperm bank. And the bank had sold out of Donor 401s genetic material.
But Mischel was in luck. As the Washington Post put it, Carla Schouten, another sperm-bank mother from San Jose, had the gift of a lifetime for Mischelan extra vial of the fathers sperm chilling in her doctors refrigerator. She gave it to Mischel, who used it to father her second child.
This is a chilling example of the Brave New World of babymakingone that puts human reproduction into the world of commerce.
Increasingly, men and women are buying and selling eggs and sperm; other women rent out their wombs for a fee. Egg donors with Ivy League educations and sperm donors with doctoral degrees can charge far more for their products. You have to wonder: How long will it be before the most popular donor fathers and egg mothers decide to cut out the middleman and sell their products on Ebay? And then imagine the child of that transactionone who finds out that Dad sold his genetic material to a total stranger because she was the highest bidder.
And what about the grandparents? How sad that the parents of men who sell their sperm may have dozens of grandchildren they will never meet. And what if grandparents decide to locate these genetic grandchildren?
Theres also the eugenics element. People who buy genetic products want the best that money can buy. For example, the man who fathered the babies of Leann Mischel and Carla Schouten, and of nine other women, is 6-foot-4, good at sports, has a masters degree, and is of German descent. It all sounds a bit like the plot of a creepy novelone that involves neo-Nazis trying to spread the seeds of a new Master Race.
What were witnessing is the triumph of genetic reductionism, which treats people as little more than the product of their DNA. There is a growing group of scientists, like Steven Pinker at MIT, who promote an alien worldview called evolutionary psychology: that our genes actually program us. In this view, the human body is not a gift from God but a purely physical object, a commodity bought and soldor cut up for parts, as with embryonic stem-cell research.
But the Bible teaches that humansfar from being mere collections of DNA or reproductive machinesare made in the image of God and that we find our ultimate identity and worth in reflecting our Creator.
Some European countries have banned donor insemination of single women and the anonymous donation of sperm and eggs. And we ought to be doing exactly the same thing here.
This broadcast brings to a close our two-week series about the War on the Weak. You need to explain to your neighbors what is at stake in the clash between the biblical worldview and many of the alien worldviews we have been discussing during this series. As is so clear from todays subject, genetic reductionism, what is at stake here is nothing less than the question of what it means to be human.
This is part ten of ten in the War on the Weak series.
I prefer people doing this than having abortions.
But they often do have abortions. 5 or 6 embryos are implanted and if 3 or 4 take one or two are aborted.
That's true of IVF, but not necessarily the case with artificial insemination. Think turkey baster.
Your definition of "best possible" is brutally materialistic, and therefore, false as it applied to humans. The "best possible" mate for a woman is not the 6'4" Perfect Specimen with the Harvard Law degree--especially when said man is bringing no love to a marriage and creating a desolate spiritual wasteland for a wife to live in and a kid to grow up in. The best possible mate is one who is able *and willing* to pour out love on behalf of his wife and child, so that the home becomes a veritable garden under which all parties can bloom and flourish. *That* is healthy and successful as it pertains to the human being.
We got plenty of physically fit, smart kids out there who are thugs and gangsters precisely because every attention was given to their physical development and none to their spiritual. For the overall health of society, I'll take the decent, God-fearing, morally upright kid with a dozen disabilities and impaired intelligence over them anyday.
As for alleged "restrictions" imposed by Church and marriage, I will remind you that in the Church, we have something called courtship and the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony, complete with evaluations and interrogations of the couple being married to make certain they are emotionally and psychologically ready for what they are doing--and it is *precisely* to ensure that both parties are aware of what they are doing and choosing the best possible mate for themselves.
It is the secularists who fling themselves into marriage without any heed to what they are doing to themselves and their potential children--who marry degenerates and drug addicts.
I was simply pointing out how in the cold world of nature, prior to the positive constructs of society, the female would look for that mate which had the best physical and mental genes to pass on.
In pre-society days, strength and intelligence would help (not guarantee) insure survival of offspring.
You are correct that in today's society it takes more than that to insure children become productive successful people.
The restrictions placed on this process by society are there for good reasons.
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.