Surrogacy: Consent and Contracts

  • Thread starter Thread starter Midwest88
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Midwest88

Guest
Today in class we talked about surrogacy. A peer of mind said he had issue with it on bio-ethical grounds and the rights of the woman whose womb was rented (he didn’t that, he said “servicing her reproductive capabilities”) and the newborn. He also mentioned the lack of regulation, both stateside and internationally, expressing some cynicism about how successful laws can protect the mother and child in this exchange. A classmate responded that he agreed that there should be more laws, but noted that the peer’s concern for the newborn was misguided stating that the women who enter this scenario do not enter it lightly, that serious thought was put into this, and that the parents (the buyers) are making a contract with a person to carry their child to term. The peer replied that the surrogacy market was creating humans as commodities to which the classmate agreed.

How would you respond to this? Given the current modern belief that awareness of the situation, consent and contracts makes almost any action neither right nor wrong, would you say that there is no limit to what humans can justify?
 
What if the discussion goes that the opposing view does not share the same or similar stance of the Vatican?
 
Yes there is no limit. Even though legal, it may not be moral.
 
Midwest88 said:
How would you respond to this? Given the current modern belief that awareness of the situation, consent and contracts makes almost any action neither right nor wrong, would you say that there is no limit to what humans can justify?
Click to expand...
I suggest you read Donum Vitae and Dignitas Personae for an in depth treatment of why surrogacy and other interventions are immoral.
 
A Theocracy is a government is run by priests/clerics. The idea that morality translates to laws is simply reality. Without legislated morality, murder, rape, slavery, fraud, theft would be permitted.

Most people are very happy for the rule of law to give some protection against such acts.
 
Human beings are persons, not commodities, and should never be treated as commodities or products for sale.
 
Midwest88 said:
Given the current modern belief that awareness of the situation, consent and contracts makes almost any action neither right nor wrong, would you say that there is no limit to what humans can justify?
Click to expand...
There is no limit. It is the original sin that humans embrace, against God. We can argue against sin on moral grounds, but the opposition squashes the argument by denying the true God, making themselves into gods.

Maybe the argument is better tackled in philosophy, both ancient and modern. It is not my area, others may offer direction.
 
@PaulfromIowa
Great link! Explains the negative social impact of surrogacy.
Every child deserves to grow up in its natural family, with its own mother and father.
 
Do you even know what a theocracy is? Are you seriously getting your pants in a twist because a handful of people think passionate kissing is a sin here on CA? I’d be rich every time someone throws the theocracy card.

“Oh thank goodness we don’t live in a theocracy!”
Should things that people think are immoral ever be made illegal?
Click to expand...
That’s sort of happening in Europe, Canada and even in the US. And guess what, it’s not the “theocracy” doing it.
I am talking things that are not currently illegal in the USA.
Click to expand...
Not a clue what you’re getting it.
 
Last edited:
That’s the funny part. Every time someone has used the theocracy card they’re usually not using it in the correct fashion. They think “prudes and ‘ew’ types take control!”
 
Yes, thank you. I stumbled upon that before my OP and I found it useful.
 
Midwest88 said:
That’s the funny part. Every time someone has used the theocracy card they’re usually not using it in the correct fashion. They think “prudes and ‘ew’ types take control!”
Click to expand...
So do you think surrogacy should be illegal in your opinion?
 
Maybe the argument is better tackled in philosophy, both ancient and modern. It is not my area, others may offer direction.
Click to expand...
Same here. I too would like someone with a philosophical/law background to comment on this. Though, I ask not to tackle it if surrogacy should be legal but instead comment on it from a moral. ethical standpoint.
 
Just by your response to my OP, that bringing up any possible moral and ethical dilemma within surrogacy I take that you have no issue with surrogacy.

So what else disturbs youabout CA forums, eh? Just list all the topics you don’t like and then run to your friends who will say, “Well, that’s the mind of the crazy social conservatives. Geez.” Go on. Because theocracy.
 
Last edited:
Jamie5 said:
Should things that people think are immoral ever be made illegal? I am talking things that are not currently illegal in the USA.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, I would love to live in a world in which it was illegal to use women to incubate other people’s artificially created children. I would love to live in a society where it was illegal to treat the children created in this manner as commodities to be bought or sold and whose fate to live or die is based on whether the buying couple want them or not. That would be a pretty improved world.

This stuff is so depraved, it is right out of a dystopian science fiction novel! “Here woman, I am going to impregnate you with this serum. In 9 months I will be back to kill three of the children because I didn’t want them, then I will take your last child away to be raised by two men, never to be seen or contacted by you again. Here is $200 for your trouble”. This is ludicrous. And yet no one bats an eye. I feel like I am taking crazy pills sometimes…
 
Last edited:
Well you’re starting in the middle of the story since I have not read the posts that have irked you. Not sure what you’re implying by endgame since this is a Catholic forum where topics like this are and should be discussed. If anything, it is to shed light on what is believed and considered sins in order to become like saints by challenging our thoughts and actions. The endgame is to get to heaven while dealing with our own fallen nature.

Seriously, you haven’t really responded directly to my OP nor to my follow up post. You just saw a topic that you just couldn’t believe was considered an issue and went in blabbering. You kept on mentioning your disbelief that posters here think X (surrogacy?) should be illegal, as if saying, “You guys think black people should not be able to drink water out of the same fountain as whites?”
Because when that happens, and one tries to impose their morals on others, that is when I bring up the Theocracy analogy because that’s precisely what it would be.
Click to expand...
Again, you don’t know what a theocracy is. Stop using that word because I can tell you’re just working off of talking points you’ve heard. A theocracy is a government where religious clergy - not to be confused with religious laymen - are elected into office. At least in the US there is no such thing, though there have been politicians who have been/are religious.

As for imposing, do you honestly think that those who are religious are the ones only “imposing” their beliefs on people? You see, that’s proof you don’t really know what you’re talking about as well as proof you don’t understand the essence of why people vote let alone discuss various matters. Everyone votes according to their conscience, thinking what they believe is true, on what they think should or should not be allowed. The false belief that purely non-religious inspired law is 100% objective is false. You and I will be under law that is derived from someone else’s sense of morals and ethics, whether that’s religious inspired or not.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top