“For some reason, Tagg Romney and his wife needed a surrogate. Nothing wrong with that and not our business.”
There in lies the problem. They needed the surrogate to create unnatural babies. Even rape makes babies, naturally. Even crack-whores make babies, naturally. Those rape and drug babies exist for natural purposes. AI, however, is purely unnatural.
The “reason” they wanted a surrogate was to create them some babies. They already had children. So, you can’t claim childless couple (that would not make it any better). So, they did it just to create unnatural babies. Everything is wrong with that.
I am not going into their house and saying them on their faces. I will however voice my opinion when raised the topic.
o. m. gosh.
Rape makes babies naturally? I thought your problem was that the Romney children weren’t conceived “traditionally”.
I cannot continue this discussion with a person who doesn’t understand the difference between natural and traditional.
natural- existing in or formed by nature ( opposed to artificial): a natural bridge.
There is no way that the Romney’s children wouldn’t have been conceived naturally. They are not artificial children. A sperm met an egg, creating an embryo. It was implanted. Just because YOU don’t like how or where that embryo implanted doesn’t make those children or AI wrong.
Comments like yours give conservative sites like FR a bad name.
Put a sock in it sager. a baby is normal no matter how conceived, carried or born. A live baby is natural. There is no such thing as an unnatural baby.
“So, they did it just to create unnatural babies. Everything is wrong with that.”
Unnatural babies. What does that even mean? What kind of judgement is that? A couple wanting children to the extent that they would go through all this trouble and expense are to be denigrated? What ever happened to judge not lest you be judged?
Does Christ consider them “unnatural babies”?