Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - the desperate women are the women forced for financial reasons to carry your embryo. The very fact that you thought about yourself first and not the womb-for-hire is very telling.

+1. There’s a reason that surrogacy is illegal in much of Western Europe. It’s exploitive.

Do you believe that about prostitution? Organ donation? Sperm donation? Egg donation? Maid services? Any other services? Aren't all services exploitative by that definition?

Yes. No if after death. No. Yes. No if paid living wage.

Ooh, so men get to make money but not women. How nice!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am indifferent to surrogacy and I can 100% say with certainty that I would easily pass on being a surrogate to the OP. Such a turn off in his thoughts and ideals.

Wow, then according to the other posters (OP here) you are a disgusting person who is exploitive. And you can't pass on being a surrogate -- because you apparently aren't allowed to make that decision.

More manipulation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why dont you focus on the child you do have rather than trying to exploit and buy a new one?

You ever heard of walking and chewing gum at the same time? Quite possible -- you should try it. Maybe you should focus on not telling people what to do with their lives, family, and bodies.

Like you trying to force women to have to be surrogates for your needs.

Anonymous wrote:You can always tell when a debate is over when one side (multiple posters) won't answer the most basic of questions, and then resort to personal attacks instead. Game over.

You are so hell bent on trying to prove you are “right.” If you have to do so, you lost.

Anonymous wrote:Ha, so all three posters (can't tell how many actually) won't answer the question. Proves my point.

You’re pathetic. No one has to answer any of your questions. Go boss your wife around.

Anonymous wrote:Haha! “You see we just want to order one baby, like a little one, can’t someone just cook it up for us out of the goodness of their heart? It seems excessive to hire someone for just one baby. One! We’re not asking for triplets here. My cousin’s friend wouldn’t even offer, and she’s got three kids, one extra pregnancy is like nothing. We could go to an agency but I mean…all that paperwork.”

OP here. I'll give that a B+. Love the paperwork ending, but went a little astray there in the middle.

Haha! “You see we just want to order one baby, like a little one, can’t someone just cook it up for us out of the goodness of their heart? It seems excessive to hire someone for just one baby. One! We’re not asking for triplets here. My cousin’s friend wouldn’t even offer, and she’s got three kids, one extra pregnancy is like nothing. We could go to an agency but I mean…all that paperwork.”

NP. As surrogacy is being increasingly limited and restricted worldwide because of issues of exploitation and harm to the resulting child, the US is also increasingly an outlier globally on surrogacy.

What this means for people seeking to use surrogacy in the US is that they will have to explain to their children why they chose the path they did. Those children will eventually bear the burden of realizing they were born out of a practice that by then will likely be widely barred worldwide. OP will probably be fine with that, but he cannot control the thoughts of his children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - the desperate women are the women forced for financial reasons to carry your embryo. The very fact that you thought about yourself first and not the womb-for-hire is very telling.

+1. There’s a reason that surrogacy is illegal in much of Western Europe. It’s exploitive.

Do you believe that about prostitution? Organ donation? Sperm donation? Egg donation? Maid services? Any other services? Aren't all services exploitative by that definition?

Yes. No if after death. No. Yes. No if paid living wage.

You can always tell when a debate is over when one side (multiple posters) won't answer the most basic of questions, and then resort to personal attacks instead. Game over.

Anonymous wrote:Why dont you focus on the child you do have rather than trying to exploit and buy a new one?

You ever heard of walking and chewing gum at the same time? Quite possible -- you should try it. Maybe you should focus on not telling people what to do with their lives, family, and bodies.

Why dont you focus on the child you do have rather than trying to exploit and buy a new one?

Anonymous wrote:I am indifferent to surrogacy and I can 100% say with certainty that I would easily pass on being a surrogate to the OP. Such a turn off in his thoughts and ideals.

Wow, then according to the other posters (OP here) you are a disgusting person who is exploitive. And you can't pass on being a surrogate -- because you apparently aren't allowed to make that decision.

Ha, so all three posters (can't tell how many actually) won't answer the question. Proves my point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is op a man? Seems more like man-child.
Probably has no balls and wife can’t get pregnant.

This is a really easy way to determine when someone is on the losing side of something -- when they resort to these types of comments. And yet you call someone else a "man-child."

Calling it what it is, man-child. Thanks for inadvertently cementing it.

So what is a man-child? I assume that is a reference to a lack of maturity, yet I have not attacked anyone in this thread. And I certainly wouldn't tell someone trying to have a family that they "have no balls and wife can't get pregnant." That is just all kinds of immature, sexist, etc. Also reeks of insecurity. You should work on that.