Skip to: Content | Sidebar | Footer

Eugenics, U.S.A.

by Jared Bridges
March 26, 2007

What do gay British men do when they want a designer baby? They pay a visit to their Uncle Sam, of course. A shortage of donor eggs and surrogate mothers in the United Kingdom has prompted some infertile gay couples to buy “designer babies” from a Los Angeles clinic:

DOZENS of gay British men have paid about £33,000 to create a baby of their chosen sex on an IVF programme for two-father families.

Nearly 20 male couples from this country have already taken part in the scheme, in which they pay for eggs from a university student which are then implanted in a different woman who bears the child.

The Fertility Institutes, the clinic in Los Angeles which runs the programme, said it had also received 25 inquiries by last week from male couples in Britain thinking of paying for surrogate children.

These $65,000 children come highly customized. Here’s clinic director Dr Jeffrey Steinberg:

On our programme, to be an egg donor, it is a requirement that you are between 18 to 27 years old and that you are currently at a university. Couples worry about the family history, and if there is a social marker of stability and achievement it is probably success at a university. University students are not interested in carrying the baby for themselves or anyone else.

The surrogates, on the other hand, are very interested in carrying the baby but, a lot of the time, they are blue-collar and not of the best of the selection [for eggs]. If we separate them we get the best egg donors and the best women to carry the babies, which is the perfect combination.

That’s right, it’s only the best for British gay dads. It’s a good thing that Dr. Steinberg is seeing to it that these “blue collar” types who continually pollute the gene pool are only used to do the “manual labor” of making a baby. Who knows what type of people we would end up with if the proletariat produced any offspring?

Of the myriad of tragedies associated with this program, one is that the children end up with a (white-collar) donor mother and a (blue collar) surrogate mother whom they will likely never know. Two “dads” simply don’t measure up to a mom. Add to this the dangers involved with IVF-PGD, and a program that touts the creation of new life can quickly become a recipe for destruction.


Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.

Comments

By: Randy | March 26, 2007 at 6:22 pm

That’s shocking. I can hardly believe it. I guess gattica should be spelled gayttica.

By: Suricou Raven | March 27, 2007 at 5:13 am

They are over-emphesising the significence of genetics for marketing purposes. Eugenics isn’t such a simple field that just cherry-picking university-attending donors will get eggs of a higher grade. Just marketing hype in that regard.

If they were trying to perform real eugenics, rather than just fake-eugenics to trick the buyers into thinking they are paying for a superior product, the company would be looking at donors’ family history, particually for any sign of inheritable predispositions to disease.

-

We have had quite a row about a similar subject in the UK recently that I am surprised the FRC has not mentioned. The government was passing a new non-discrimination bill – it makes it illegal to deny a service to someone on the basis of sexual orientation. The Catholic church, and to a lesser extent the Church of England, demanded that they be given exemptions, particually regarding their church-run adoption services.

The RCC said that if it didn’t get the exemptions, then it would have no choice but to shut down every adoption service it runs in the country. Then only of their bishops actually said this threat was ‘not blackmail.’ Apparently they consider that if they have to place a few children with gay couples, then its better that *all* the children remain in care.

The law passed (Though it was close in the Lords), without exemptions. The Church has yet to make good on its threat.

It was a good debate, while it lasted – the church kept saying that the government shouldn’t be legislating morality or forcing people to go against their religious beliefs, while the government replied that in a democracy the people can (via representative) pass a law even if a minority disagrees with it, and that the whole legal system would fall apart if said minority can declare itsself outside of any law it disapproves of.

By: Randy Thomas | March 27, 2007 at 10:09 am

GA”Y”TTACA

Remember the movie GATTACA? Well, read about the GAYTTACA version … in real life. (From the FRC Blog)What do gay British men do when they want a designer baby? They pay a visit to their Uncle Sam, of course. A