Comments on: Mastering Nature

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 19:26:29 +0000

Or maybe a couple of gay men could just save the $100K price for surrogacy and have enough money to put a non-genetic child through college. In addition to affluence, a huge ego must be required to spend so much money just to pass on one’s genes, rather than choose to care for the “genes” of two other people in the form of an adopted child.

Of course, this goes for straight couples as well. Maybe it should go even more for straight couples

By: NancyP

NancyP — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:25:06 +0000

Gay men have always had children. Just had them the old-fashioned way. Maybe not their fave thing to do, but they were more or less obliged to do their duty to keep the family line going.

By: Jon Rowe

Jon Rowe — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 21:24:07 +0000

Re: Gay men. Flip a coin. Use both sperm and whose ever wins wins. Make a deal where the first baby uses my sperm, the second yours. I’d imagine that’s how many of these issues are resolved.

And btw, I do a great deal of debunking Christian Nationalism myself.

By: AMW

AMW — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 21:15:11 +0000

Jon,

Sorry about that. My mind tends to compartmentalize the four authors: Jason talks about gay issues, history, and quirky mind-benders, Timothy covers eminent domain, Ed debunks Christian Nationalism, and you post YouTube files. I know there’s plenty of crossover, but my stereotypes make it simpler for me.

I would imagine the whole notion of picking which partner’s basket of genes will be thrown into the mix is a toughie for negotiation. How does one tell one’s significant other, “I love you, but I don’t want my child polluted with your genes.” I imagine the issue resolves itself more often for female homosexual couples: one may be more averse to going throug childbirth than the other. But for men there’s no real biological price to be paid.

By: Jon Rowe

Jon Rowe — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:56:46 +0000

Jon again.

Not sure. I think I’ve heard of cases like the one you describe. It’s all done by negotation though

One thing seems apparent — when males use surrogate mothers or when females use sperm banks, most folks realize that “genes matter” so to speak. Thus, if folks can get accurate info, most will select for “desirable” genes (better looks, higher intelligence, various talents, lack of health problems). One issue that may be tough to get around presently is that “you can’t have it all.” Most folks are dealt a set of genetic cards that are a mixed bag. Someone may have a brilliant IQ but be unnattractive and unathletic, another good looking, athletic, but lower than average IQ, or a subject to a congenital heart problem. Look at Melissa Etheridge. David Crosby isn’t the best looking guy in the world, and has had problems with addiction. They were going for musicial talent with that one.

By: AMW

AMW — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:05:43 +0000

Jason,

I didn’t read the article, so maybe my question is answered there, but I’m both curious and lazy. In cases of homosexual procreation via surrogacy, do you know if it’s typical for the gay couple to negotiate who will be making the DNA donation? Or is it ever the case to donate sperm from both partners and just let chance decide? I’m sure there’s an economics paper in there, somewhere.