I wonder if the LA Times would run the same story - except that the reason the "mother and father" aborted the babies is because two of them would have a higher chance of becoming homosexual...
Still, I had reservations about bringing girls into the world now, when forces seemed to be aligning to disenfranchise them (nine of 10 GOP presidential candidates favor reversing Roe vs. Wade).
The only “forces” aligned against these baby girls are thier own parents. They certainly have no problem disenfranchising them from life. Does this idot know how ironic, and sick, this statement is?
What an asinine statement you chose to quote! (not your fault)
He aborted the boys because they have a statistical chance of being autistic? Give me a break! As the grandmother of an autistic child, I am offended by the “sperm donor’s” comment! Then, he adds kerosene to the blaze by saying that he also was reluctant to bring girls into the world because of Republican efforts to curtail Roe v. Wade.
Why didn’t he just get rid of all of them at once? THere are so many chances to have this man’s perfect little world upset. sarcasm/off
I pity those poor little girls being raised in that awful environment. I hope the parents change their minds and put them up for adoption to a good and loving home that appreciates them as human beings — not designer babies.
And if he is so worried about the health of his wife carrying multiples, why is she continuing with twins? This whole story sounds bogus to me.