[coconutt2000]

I'm just pointing out that if anybody wants to make an issue about this, it is a far lesser moral infraction than having an abortion.

Shopping for what one might consider superior or preferable genetic material is pretty much a crap shoot, so I don't see this as any particular kind of threat to the valuation of human life.

Thus, being indignant over this gene shopping, as the author seems to be, is pointless. I'd rather spend my energy on the real issue involving procreative control, which is abortion on demand.

[steve-b]

Shopping for what one might consider superior or preferable genetic material is pretty much a crap shoot, so I don't see this as any particular kind of threat to the valuation of human life.

Shopping for what one might consider superior or preferable genetic material is an absolute individual right.

[GovernmentShrinker]

And then imagine the child of that transaction—one who finds out that Dad sold his genetic material to a total stranger because she was the highest bidder.

This is just the gender-reverse of what has been common practice for centuries: women (or their parents, in societies where arranged marriage is the norm) shop around for the wealthiest husband they can land, to father their children, and support mom and the kids. In other words, mom sells her genetic material to the highest bidder, whose primary interest in entering into the arrangement is to get children which are genetically half his.

[Mr. Silverback]

I'm just pointing out that if anybody wants to make an issue about this, it is a far lesser moral infraction than having an abortion.

When i first read that sentence, for some reason my brain rendered it as "moral infarction," and I'd just like to note that Moral Infarction would be a great name for a band. :-)