View Single Post
Old 23-08-2009, 10:14 AM #32
BB22 BB22 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,978
BB22 BB22 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,978
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by lucifer1968
What is the difference, do you think, between a heterosexual couple conceiving "just to get a child", and, for example, a couple consisting of two homosexual males enlisting the assistance of a happy and willing female surrogate in order to have a child?



you can't have your cake and eat it

people have accepted his way off life.he should accept the FACT that two males DONT HAVE children
Well, we have already established that you have no objection to gay males adopting children. You said that in an earlier post. Yet there seems to be some conflict between that statement and your latest post.

Let's clarify your position:

You have no moral objection to gay males adopting children.

You have no moral objection to heterosexual couples conceiving using insemination techniques.

You do have a moral objection to homosexuals employing a willing female to act as a surrogate and employing insemination techniques to conceive a child.

A further question: let us imagine a heterosexual couple, in which the female is unable to bear and carry a child, would you have any moral objection to said couple employing a willing female to act as a surrogate and employing insemination techniques to conceive a child, which would be carried by the surrogate but raised by the couple?
BB22 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote