Surrogacy

[Subduction Zone]

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).

Okay, that appears to be the start of a logical argument.

That said, gay parenthood is very delicate issue in my country.
For instance, as for transsesxuals, 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.

And we are off the rails. You are conflating sex with gender. Gender is the expression of one's perceived sexuality. What does this have to do with surrogacy?

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

No, not that is not what happens here. Wow! Did you take a strange turn. The post had promise at the start and then went off into lala land.

 

[McBell]

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.

I not aware of any thread I have derailed.
Perhaps SalixIncendium would be so kind as to support their claim of it?

 

[SalixIncendium]

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.

Then, once again, create your own thread.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I not aware of any thread I have derailed.
Perhaps SalixIncendium would be so kind as to support their claim of it?

He won't be. Also, he won't so kind as to continue to help you to correct your course.

 

[McBell]

He won't be. Also, he won't so kind as to continue to help you to correct your course.

Dismissed for lack of evidence then.

Of course, I shall make this my post in this thread.
So your continued baiting will be of no avail.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am speaking of homosexuality.
How do you define a trans man who is in a relationship (or marries) a cis man?
Gay couple, right?
Just think if they have sex, and the trans man gets pregnant.

Read above.
Your stance? A biological woman can be considered a father?

I an not entering into your derail. You were supposed to support the law or oppose it. You post had nothing to do with your premise. It brought up another matter entirely. No one was even discussing trans verses non-trans here.

 

[Secret Chief]

It's the gayest country in Europe.

No it is not. From the article:

"targeting LGBT families"

"They are getting ready to escape, seeking political asylum in more LGBT-friendly European countries.
gay marriage is illegal, and same-sex couples have fewer rights than in most of Western Europe.
Artificial insemination or adoption are not options for LGBT couples here"

 

[Subduction Zone]

I not aware of any thread I have derailed.
Perhaps SalixIncendium would be so kind as to support their claim of it?

Okay, but why bring up a topic that is not in the thread. Nor was it in the article? You can get in trouble for purposefully derailing a thread. This is only one of surrogacy and there was nothing even claimed by the extremists supporting this bill that claimed that trafficking was involved.

 

[Secret Chief]

something unresolved or that if the parental vocation is really innate and strong

Are you being ignorant or patronising?

 

[Revoltingest]

Only backward?
I expected more adjectives...fascistic, racist, homophobic...

"Backward" is a good summary.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The article posted by the OP is not only about surrogacy.
It's about LGBT parenthood, as the OP specifies. He points that out explicitly.




So I am not derailing this thread. This thread is about LGBT life and parenthood in the boot.

And trans and non-trans is not the issue. Why even bring that up?

 

[Secret Chief]

The article posted by the OP is not only about surrogacy.
It's about LGBT parenthood, as the OP specifies. He points that out explicitly.




So I am not derailing this thread. This thread is about LGBT life and parenthood in the boot.

No it isn't.

 

[Secret Chief]

The topic of this thread is surrogacy. Other topics are not the topic of this thread.


Thanks y'all.

 

[Estro Felino]

The topic of this thread is surrogacy. Other topics are not the topic of this thread.


Thanks y'all.

Ok...I was misled by the article, then.
Sorry.

 

[Estro Felino]

And trans and non-trans is not the issue. Why even bring that up?

Sorry...I was wrong.
I though it was about gay parenthood (and surrogacy).

 

[Estro Felino]

As a jurist, I will say this is not a law that will have a punitive purpose.
It will have a dissuasive purpose, mainly.

Italy's family law wants to dissuade people (whether they are gay or straight) from having babies through this practice.
Period.
Because it makes things more and more complicated, since our law is mainly based upon the inextricable relation between DNA and parenthood.

First of all, it's the DNA that says who the parent is.
And secondly the law.

 

[Secret Chief]

"Surrogacy is when a woman carries and gives birth to a baby for another person or couple.

Who might have surrogacy?​

Surrogacy may be appropriate for women with a medical condition that makes it impossible or dangerous for them to get pregnant and give birth. These include:

• absence or malformation of the womb
• recurrent pregnancy loss
• repeated in vitro fertilisation (IVF) implantation failures.

It’s also a popular option for male same-sex couples who want to have a family and can be used by people who are single.

In the UK, you can only pay a surrogate for their expenses."

- Surrogacy | HFEA

 

[PureX]

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.

Homosexuals have all the same feelings and desires about having a family as anyone else does. And they are just as capable of living successfully in a family environment as anyone else is. And there is no evidence or reasoning that would suggest they are inherently bad parents. My objection is not to homosexuals being parents. It's to paying money for the use of someone else's body. I think that as a general rule, this should not be allowed in a civilized society.

 

[Estro Felino]

Homosexuals have all the same feelings and desires about having a family as anyone else does. And they are just as capable of living successfully in a family environment as anyone else is. And there is no evidence or reasoning that would suggest they are inherently bad parents. My objection is not to homosexuals being parents. It's to paying money for the use of someone else's body. I think that as a general rule, this should not be allowed in a civilized society.

I agree.
But there is an instrument for that: adoption.

 

[PureX]

I agree.
But there is an instrument for that: adoption.

Yes, but some people really want their offspring to be biologically connected to them. And that's a difficult thing to achieve for a homosexual couple. Impossible without third party help. But that desire should not be allowed to overwhelm our fundamental respect for the sanctity of human bodily autonomy.

If a third party willingly offers their body to provide the homosexual couple that aid, that is their right. And the state has no business intervening. But when money becomes the determining factor of that 'willingness', then the willingness is no longer genuine. It's being coerced. And that is where the line protecting bodily autonomy is being crossed, and the state should step in and disallow it.