Posted on 12/07/2017 6:06:28 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
Rep. Trent Franks, an Arizona Republican who is among the most conservative members of the House, said he would resign his seat after House officials learned that he had asked two female employees to bear his children as surrogates.
Frankss announcement came as the House Ethics Committee said it would create a special subcommittee to investigate Franks for conduct that constitutes sexual harassment and/or retaliation for opposing sexual harassment.
His resignation, which Franks said is effective Jan. 31, will end the ethics investigation........
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Idiot should just have gone the ADOPTION ROUTE. Plenty of children/babies needing homes.
If you chose this route you go through a liscensed agency who pre-screens willing surgates. With the proper contracts and fees paid.
From his statement linked in this thread, “But in the midst of this current cultural and media climate, I am deeply convinced I would be unable to complete a fair House Ethics investigation before distorted and
sensationalized versions of this story would put me, my family, my staff, and my noble colleagues in the House of Representatives through hyperbolized public
excoriation. Rather than allow a sensationalized trial by media damage those things I love most, this morning I notified House leadership that I will be leaving
Congress as of January 31st, 2018.”
“I am deeply convinced I would be unable to complete a fair House Ethics investigation” You do NOT quit if there is truly nothing to see. He knows the game, obviously when you are an elected official you face scrutiny and a biased media, that is nothing new. There has got to be more to this. I just get the feeling that he is quitting to avoid the scrutiny and possibly being found guilty of something completely unrelated to what we see here.
But he wanted to bypass the artificial insemination part and use the more traditional approach. :)
The surrogacy thing, appalling if he did it, had to be the tip of the iceberg. And if this is the least objectionable thing he did....Yikes. Good riddence.
It is still asking for implantation of the product, in part, of your boss’s sperm—which is just a hideous thing for a boss to ask a female employee about.
The GOP continues to be the stupid party.
Still way too private a thing for a boss to ask an employee.
But the employee should have told him so at the time and been done with it.
This years-later firing over this type of however inappropriate error is absurd. And it is all a set up to try to get Trump—which is what Pence’s good pal Ryan has been up to all along.
I wish he did not resign.
It signals what the Dims want to happen - allegations alone are the standard for “guilt”.
In Franks case, the worst that seems to have happened is the two females Franks spoke to - about him & his wife’s problem of not being able to conceive, and their looking for a surrogate - said they felt “uncomfortable”.
So now “feeling uncomfortable” is equal with “sexual harassment or abuse”??
What about simply telling the person you feel uncomfortable then and there at the time; then they apologize (as I think in Frank’s case he had no intent to make anyone uncomfortable), and the issue is over.
Guilt has until very recently required intention and or KNOWING an action was going to be received negatively whether you intended it to or not.
Now “guilt” not only no longer requires intention, it does not even require knowledge beforehand that the action would have been received negatively. The only thing needed for “guilt” is the other persons “feelings”. Yet “feelings” are 100% up to the person that has them, arise from their own thinking and not directly from (and may not even arise from) actions someone takes. YOU CHOOSE to “feel” by how you think.
In this case Franks was suppose to know, beforehand, what the two females were going to think about the subject they were asked about??
I wish Franks would take back his resignation. I’d be happy to become his public P.R. person.
In the workplace one needs to go out of their way to avoid a perception of inappropriate behavior. That's just the way it is. That plus being married, I can tell you just how few women actually respect that relationship and crap can spin out of control before one gets a hand on it (uhm, so to speak.)
Nope we are not all saints but for him to simply leave, there has to be something more to this, there just has to be.
You don't just walk away without a fight if you are innocent. Look at Judge Moore - if you stand righteous before the Lord you can prevail. What is this guy's excuse?
I think I agree. I don't know exactly what this is.
The wife should have done the asking or some third party.
congresscritter was stupid. It was a stupid, stupid, stupid thing to do and he should have known it was extremely risky.
He flushed his job right down the John.
Surrogacy is not "orgasmic" but it >b>is sexual by definition, since we procreate sexually. It's called sexual reproduction. Having offspring is a major part, maybe the major part, of human sexuality, of being a male or a female.
Having children with anybody other than your spouse violates the exclusivity of the vows and the meaning of faithful monogamy.
Moreover, surrogacy divides women up into separate zones for exploitation: the vagina, the ovaries, the uterus, the heart and mind where the baby-mother bonding is formed. Divided up.
Surrogacy requires a psychologically "surgical" detachment between the baby and the mother who carries him in her womb. It amputates baby-mother bonding, or --- to use another analogy --- it starves it to death. It separates childbearing from maternal bonding, and thus separates the maternal womb from the maternal heart.
No way good intentions can justify bad actions. Surrogacy is de-personalization from the git-go: it intentionally, by plan, denies the baby's right to his primordial maternal bond, and leaves a wound on the soul of the deliberately-bereft gestational mother.
It doesn't matter if the person solicited to the scheme of mothering-without-mothering is paid or unpaid, an employee, a family member, a fertility clinic specialist or your former girlfriend. It's de-personalizing per se.
I never called it sexual harassment. It would be more properly called solicitation to reproductive concubinage.
If he asked subordinates or co-workers to be a surrogate for him and his wife, that is creepy and he should resign. It's totally inappropriate.
If he was and asked subordinates questions about general issues such as agencies or doctors that can help with surrogacy process, then he should not resign.
If he asked subordinates or co-workers to be a surrogate for him and his wife, that is creepy and he should resign. It's totally inappropriate.
If he was and asked subordinates questions about general issues such as agencies or doctors that can help with surrogacy process, then he should not resign.
“This just isn’t a problem for me.”
Me either. Assuming he was seriously interested in finding a surrogate for artificial insemination, and not using it as a pick-up line (and no one is saying different), then this is just not an issue.
There must be something more to the story, or why else would he agree to resign?
Word in AZ is there was another incident he would rather not discuss so this one was used a viable reason.
Either way it’s a damn shame to lose a good conservative rep with an A+ NRA rating. I just hope we can replace him with an equally good Freedom Caucus type person and not some GOPe cuck.
And apparently, a number of people here on FR want to believe the Washington Post’s claim that they heard from 3 anonymous Republicans. From Fake News WaPo. Silliness.
You didnt call it sexual harassment but thats what RINO Paul Ryan called it then told this very conservative pro lifer he needed to resign, Ryan is a snake in the grass. He hates conservatives like his big brother McConnell.
I think the nail just met the hammer.
Probably something else out there.
However, since there is only one legitimate way to "get" a baby --- via the marital act, intercourse, with your one-and-only honestly married spouse --- then with due respect to the baby, all the other ways are illegitimate: fornication, adultery, artificial insemination, prostitution, IVF, rape, surrogacy, breeding farms (like the Nazi eugenicists) or ---looking forward to the near-future --- gestation by machine.
These demean the baby. In view of the sanctity of marriage and the natural rights of the baby, these "ways to get" should not be.
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.