Thursday, April 25, 2013

A memo from a French citizen on same-sex marriage, slavery, eugenics, and human rights

Some of the legal details are different for the U.S. However, the logic is the same. We are on a dangerous path indeed.

Friday, April 12, 2013
ENGLISH TRANSLATION -English Manif - by Robert Oscar Lopez (I'm not as good as Papa Maman!)
The Marriage for All Bill put forward by French Attorney General Christiane Taubira points to a right to adoption, hence by default an orphaned child (by the death or abandonment of a parent).

But gay parents who would like children, without the power to conceive them by the absence of fertility (not by a medical condition such as infertility), will claim the possibility of artificial insemination with a third-party donor (called in French PMA) for women, or the possibility of having a "carrier female" carry the child (called in French GPA).

Since it is permitted by science, biology, and medicine, PMA will automatically be conferred in the same of equality to heterosexual couples, in conformity with the jurisprudence of the European Court of the Rights of Man, even in the absence of a pathological concern such as infertility:

The ministerial memo authorizing the conferral of citizenship in France for children illegally conceived with surrogate mothers on foreign soil (GPA is currently illegal in France) means that there will be no need to pass laws on the subject in France itself. GPA will be declared possible in France under the same name, except on foreign soil, by the CEDH.

As soon as the memo essentially making GPA possible in France, even though it is illegal, was published, GPA centers immediately seized on the chance to start doing marketing. A number of companies specializing in surrogacy for pay in the nations that allow such practices advertised on the internet and on social networks, in French, though these companies were based in California, Denmark, Russia, the Ukraine, or China:

The baby becomes "a gift for the family," reversing the role of adoption which is a gift to a child of a family.

Others are proposing to pregnant women who do not want to keep their child, that they allow their children to be sold and then resold for profit:

Director Michael Doyle, of one of the companies, makes regular tours in Europe and in Paris to meet with parental candidates and promote his trade in the suites of luxury hotels:

PMA and GPA are services for pay and to make them officially legal, we would resurrect in a legal fashion slavery and servitude, and more generally we would create the conditions for a business for buying and selling the whole human being (embryos, infants, childrens), or parts detached of human beings (organs), seen as the part of a whole (babies medically speaking ... missed a word, ROL). THe choice of a type of child and its characteristics bring us back to eugenics:

The cost of a child in GPA varies according to the country, the quality of procreation, the type of contract, and the guaranties. It can range from 5,000 to 100,000 euros, not including travel and nights in a hotel, not including recruiting. California is trying to force the community to cover these costs through health exchanges for all types of couples who can prove they have tried to become pregnant for a year and failed -- even if they couples are homosexual and not engaging in heterosexual intercourse!

Hence the "Right to a Child" allows us to create a necessary market for buying and selling human beings and puts in place the conditions for a neo-slavery of poor women:

The Rights of the Child and the Rights of the Woman as declared by the United Nations are threatened by this bill and that brings us back to the worst hours of our humanity:

These corollary powers will be available to gay and straight couples, or to single adults, or soon to entire communities.
The child will be offered as birthday present for Christmas, or on the occasion of Mothers' Day, as a puppy or a kitten would. A baby is always a great joy, but what will become of the child later, when its traits are obviously totally different from its new owners?

Not knowing either its ancestors or its kin, how will doctors be able to diagnose, predict and treat hereditary and genetic illnesses of these children?
Sperm donors being not necessarily numerous but still quite prolific, they might give rise to hundreds of unknown children -- the risk of incest is huge!

The uncontestable links of flesh and blood will be replaced by links of commerce or subordination, designated by contract. What will happen in case of conflicts, should adults and adolescents not wish to obey such contracts? Is this going to be a case dragged before a chamber of commerce?
Will this bill be for the special benefit of the directors and stockholders of these companies that commercialize genetic material to manufacture human beings?


  1. I never seen such weak arguments. No wonder the gays are winning.

    1. It's possible to oppose relativism in thoughtful and intelligent ways, which are more likely to be persuasive. This sort of raving undermines Al's reputation as a voice of reason--and the blog as a place of reason and thoughtful opposition to the left in this country. I love the radio show, which has always impressed me for its thoughtfulness, even if I disagree. But some of the material being posted by Al is beyond questionable and is bad for readers' moral character, because it encourages people to think the worst of others.

    2. I also love the show -- because it's always intelligent. This is just craziness. My personal view, which is not in line with Church teaching on this particular issue, is that gay marriage is no big deal. Time will tell. But I don't think Catholics will be affected in any meaningful way.

    3. While not formulated in a concise manner, the argument is valid, and I apologize in advance for the objectifying language-

      If a married couple has the right to children at all, legally, preventing them from having that right (even from lack of supply) is 'unethical'. This can generally be avoided in heterosexual couples-"you want one? make your own!", a couple that is inherently procreationally incompatible will need special consideration to their right to a child.

      From a more philosophical standpoint, saying a couple has the right to a child inherently applies servitude. The selfish ownership of children by parents is well in line with tendencies we've been seeing for decade-no fault divorce, abortion, contraceptives, now gay marriage- that views marriage primarily for the satisfaction of the couple, not for the rearing of the children. It is certainly possible to see the trends and make the assumption that a new form of slavery is on the way-We already have the right to kill an entire group of human beings (the unborn, that is) why is slavery so far fetched?

  2. Really? You don't see the logic here or how a neo-servitude, particularly of poorer women, could be an unforeseen effect of the legalization of same-sex so-called marriage?

  3. Issue must also be taken with your comment, Anonymous: "But some of the material being posted by Al is beyond questionable and is bad for readers' moral character, because it encourages people to think the worst of others." Predicting negative, unforeseen effects of looming legislation and Supreme Court decisions, is not "thinking the worst of others." It is, rather, right judgment and discernment which we are certainly called to, as Catholics in the public square.

    1. From the Catechism: 2479. "Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one's neighbor. Honor is the SOCIAL witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of JUSTICE and charity."

      I certainly agree that Catholic media voices must advocate and teach the true faith and its requirements for living. But I also agree with Cardinal Dolan that it's important to do this in ways that do not alienate or cause pain to others, in this case gays. Most people have at least one gay person in their lives that they love and cherish and there is no need to tell them that their desire to marry will be the cause of a new form of child or infant slavery.

  4. You really think this particular article represents "right judgment"? It's an unintelligible rant suggesting that the end of civilization, or at least of decent civilization, is traceable to gay marriage! There are many thoughtful opponents on same sex marriage you could post. I read an excellent statement on Catholic Voices. Don't go crazy on us, Al.

    1. Catholic intellectuals are at a low point in history. This is the real reason public opinion ignores Catholic social teaching. When I read a statement against same sex marriage I feel the arguments are not compelling and are certainly not made in a compelling way. There is quite clearly a lack of powerful intellects on the side of tradition.

    2. It's polemical, not scholarly. It's ammunition, not meant to persuade anyone, but it might stir up a bit of hatred.