• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Surrogacy

Secret Chief

nirvana is samsara
Surrogacy...

"Italian authorities are bringing in new measures targeting LGBT families and making it harder for them to have children. Many same-sex parents feel that a new law, which would make it illegal to have surrogacy abroad, is a personal attack against them.
"We have two options: to stay in Italy and face prison, or to run away."
Husbands Claudio and Davide (not their real names) have a baby on the way through surrogacy - a woman in another country is carrying their son for them.
The practice is illegal in Italy and most of Europe, so couples travel to countries where it is legal - such as the US and Canada - and bring their babies back home.
But the Italian senate is set to approve a bill that would make surrogacy a "universal crime" - one so serious that it would be prosecuted even if committed abroad, like human trafficking or paedophilia.
No other country has a similar ban.
If the bill becomes law, couples like Claudio and Davide could face a fine of one million euros (£872,000) and up to two years in jail."

‘The state says our kids don’t exist’ - how LGBT life is changing in Italy

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
The problem is that we should guarantee gay couples the right to adopt.
This would be a solution.

I think, on the other side, that surrogacy, even in the case of heterosexual couples, is not good.
It's turning motherhood into a business. Commodifying babies.
That's not acceptable. It's not against gay couples.
It's not acceptable even if it's straight couples.

PS: my opinion is protected by the First Amendment, so I kindly expect people to respect my view, which is not the law. It's just a personal, subjective view. Even if there may be users who did engage in this practice.
Thank you. :)
 

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Nasty, popularist policies.
Kids brought up in a loving family thrive, irrespective of the sex of their parents.
What does this have to do with measures taken to reduce human trafficking?
 

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Er, surrogacy is the title. Presumably most folk think human trafficking is a bad thing, but feel free to start a thread on it.
So the fact that the "anti-surrogacy movement" is an attempt at slowing down human trafficking, not an attack on the can't have children crowd...
 
"Italian authorities are bringing in new measures targeting LGBT families and making it harder for them to have children. Many same-sex parents feel that a new law, which would make it illegal to have surrogacy abroad, is a personal attack against them.
"We have two options: to stay in Italy and face prison, or to run away."
Husbands Claudio and Davide (not their real names) have a baby on the way through surrogacy - a woman in another country is carrying their son for them.
The practice is illegal in Italy and most of Europe, so couples travel to countries where it is legal - such as the US and Canada - and bring their babies back home.
But the Italian senate is set to approve a bill that would make surrogacy a "universal crime" - one so serious that it would be prosecuted even if committed abroad, like human trafficking or paedophilia.
No other country has a similar ban.
If the bill becomes law, couples like Claudio and Davide could face a fine of one million euros (£872,000) and up to two years in jail."

‘The state says our kids don’t exist’ - how LGBT life is changing in Italy

Thoughts?

Not something I know much about to have much of an opinion about, but I guess a lot of the time folk are paying poor women to be a surrogate.

The ethics of this are at least questionable and open for debate.

Can make a case for or against commercial surrogacy.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I have to say that I think paying a woman to biologically gestate your child is stepping over the line in terms of disrespecting the bodily autonomy of our fellow human beings. In much the same way that I feel prostitution is likewise stepping over that same line. We need to have limits to what we can do to each other under the guise of commerce and freedom.

I'm sorry that homosexuality precludes those couples from procreating. And if they find a man or woman that is willing to enable them to procrate NOT FOR MONEY, then that's a personal choice between them. But purchasing the use of another human being's body for the fulfillment of selfish desires is crossing a line that as a society and a species, I think it's a very bad idea to allow ourselves to cross.
 

Secret Chief

nirvana is samsara
So the fact that the "anti-surrogacy movement" is an attempt at slowing down human trafficking, not an attack on the can't have children crowd...
Sorry, I don't know anything about an anti-surrogacy movement, feel free to enlighten me :)

(I started this thread because of my ignorance).
 
Last edited:

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
What does this have to do with measures taken to reduce human trafficking?
So the fact that the "anti-surrogacy movement" is an attempt at slowing down human trafficking, not an attack on the can't have children crowd...
If you want to discuss human trafficking, create a thread. This thread is about surrogacy, not human trafficking. You won't be derailing this one.

Thank you.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
How much more backward can Italy get?
Only backward?
I expected more adjectives...fascistic, racist, homophobic...
;)


I'm kidding of course.
I think it's not backward. It's the gayest country in Europe. But also one of the most conservative as for family values. So that creates a huge conflict.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
So the fact that the "anti-surrogacy movement" is an attempt at slowing down human trafficking, not an attack on the can't have children crowd...
How are the two related? That appears to rely on an extreme redefinition of the term "human trafficking". Now I can see how a side that has no evidence for their beliefs would make such a claim. It makes it sound as if one is doing something good. But one cannot simply assume that this was done in opposition to human trafficking. One would have to justify that claim.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I have to say that I think paying a woman to biologically gestate your child is stepping over the line in terms of disrespecting the bodily autonomy of our fellow human beings. In much the same way that I feel prostitution is likewise stepping over that same line. We need to have limits to what we can do to each other under the guise of commerce and freedom.

I'm sorry that homosexuality precludes those couples from procreating. And if they find a man or woman that is willing to enable them to procrate NOT FOR MONEY, then that's a personal choice between them. But purchasing the use of another human being's body for the fulfillment of selfish desires is crossing a line that as a society and a species, I think it's a very bad idea to allow ourselves to cross.
Many gay couples think that raising a child, even if adopted is not a good idea.

I would like to understand a gay couple's parental vocation. Through a psychological expertise.
To understand if we are speaking of something unresolved or that if the parental vocation is really innate and strong.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
If you want to discuss human trafficking, create a thread. This thread is about surrogacy, not human trafficking. You won't be derailing this one.

Thank you.
It sounds as if he has done this elsewhere. I cannot see any connection. Is any group out there even claiming that there is some sort of trafficking going on? The charge appears to be ludicrous on the face of it.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Many gay couples think that raising a child, even if adopted is not a good idea.

I would understand a gay couple's parental vocation. Through a psychological expertise.
To understand if we are speaking of something unresolved or that if the parental vocation is really innate and strong.
Here is the really really cool thing about adoption. If as a couple one does not think that adoption is right for you, you do not have to adopt anyone.

Pretty neat, huh?
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Here is the really really cool thing about adoption. If as a couple one does not think that adoption is right for you, you do not have to adopt anyone.

Pretty neat, huh?
Premise: secular principles guide the lawmaking process. Not religious one (otherwise there wouldn't even be gay marriage, if religion played a role in the lawmaking process).

That said, gay parenthood is a very delicate issue in my country.
For instance, as for transsexuals, a trans man (who is a biological woman, at birth) cannot be considered a mother by the law.
So if he decides to have a baby, by having sex with a man, he will be considered the mother of that baby, by law. Not the father.
And that's the reason why the law requires sterilization to have your anagraphical name and gender changed.

Sterilization in order to avoid that a trans man can deliver babies, and yet, consider himself "father". Which is what happens in the US.
 

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
If you want to discuss human trafficking, create a thread. This thread is about surrogacy, not human trafficking. You won't be derailing this one.

Thank you.
Except the reason for the laws in the OP is an attempt to stifle human trafficking.
NOT an attack on LGBT.

But whatever floats y'all boats.
 
Top