The New Road

Heaven forbid, something should happen to you and your wife . . . who would you choose to raise your child? Someone you trust - with similar values as yours?

If there were several capable, willing families from which to choose, wouldn't you choose the one that would raise your precious child as closely to the way you would raise her yourself?

Would you hate it if she ended up with a conservative-Christian, white, upper-class married couple?

Just curious.

I don't make judgments about people like you do. And certainly not judgments based on labels.

And I give my kids, and all kids, credit to be able to see through neo-con fascist bullshit.

So, no, I actually don't want to have any say in who can raise a child. It's none of my business. It's only Christians who feel like they can stick their noses into other people's reproductive business.

Lori pointed out to me that you didn't distinguish between cells in a petri dish and a living breathing human. Likely because you don't distinguish between the two.

I do however, distinguish between the two, and like any responsible parent I have a will that specifies what will happen to Megan in the unlikely event of our untimely deaths.

That being said, should Christian mobs bent on Dominionist destruction decide that my wife and I, and our close relations, being atheist or whatever, have "no right to exist", and wipe us out. Then, really, I wouldn't write up some bullshit standard what race or creed of person should act as new parents to Megan.

Unfortunately, after having read some Dominionist material today it's clear that being lynched by Christian death mobs based on their view of Biblical law is not that far fetched. Being an atheist, or having lost one's religion, is punishable by death.

I have a will that specifies what will happen to Megan in the unlikely event of our untimely deaths.

That's all I asked. Thanks for your answer, even though I had two read through the rest of the rant twice to make sure I extracted the actual answer part.

The next question is - why don't these parents, who have created these embryos, have a right to choose who raises their children?

I mean, they weren't sperm & egg donors for some anonymous infertile couple. These parents went in together to create these embyros to be their own children. They cared about the "product" they were creating. If the embryos are undestroyed and implanted and do become breathing humans, then they are, biologically, children of these two parents. Why shouldn't they designate who raises their kids?

I'm merely distinguishing between the rights of people who donate or sell sperm or eggs to a bank for mass consumption and parents who intentionally create embryos for their own family's use.

Separately, sperm and eggs are cells in a dish. Once together and fertilized, they are the beginning of . . . people.

Don't donors sign away their parental rights? Do people who create embryos? I don't know.

Why assume the people that want to raise the embryo are bad people unless they sign some fields on a checkbox form? Shouldn't we assume that people who want to be parents are qualified to do so?

I'm glad you extracted a real answer from my response.

I'm still waiting on a response from you about whether you think Presidents should be held accountable for lying to the American people.

Yes. Liars should be held accountable. Presidents, Garbagemen, Pastors, Spouses, Criminals - anyone who lies. There are consequences for decisions. Or at least there should be.

Shouldn't we assume that people who want to be parents are qualified to do so?

Absolutely not. Even if she wants another child, Andrea Yates should have her tubes tied. So should Susan Smith. Christian Longo should be executed - but if he lives, he should be sterilized. I think those are all heterosexual, white "christian" people, by the way.

My next door neighbor is a 35 year old single mother, welfare recipient,recovering addict who has been clean less than a year with seven children, ages 17 to 1. I don't think she should be "qualified" to have any more children soon.

I'm sure potential adoptive parents are screened. I know one of our friends went through a lot of scrutiny when she was in the process of adoption. The agency determines, based on a set of criteria, who will provide the most favorable conditions for the child.

You'd do the same for a dog.

Why shouldn't the parents be able to have input into what kind of home their child is raised in?

Excellent. I'm glad to hear that you hold your President to ethical standards. If you are sincere about that please visit johnconyers.com and sign the petition to demand that the President answer our questions about the Downing Street Memo.

As to who should parent. You feel comfortable having peoples tubes tied, or whatever. Ok. But that's not me. I rely on the law and on the processes we have in place for ensuring that the welfare of children is maintained as a society. I personally do not feel that I have the right to decide for someone else if they have the right to reproduce or parent. I understand that you feel (backed up by your religion) you have the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body. I'm glad that, for the moment, the law is on my side.