• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should it be legal to pay surrogates to have babies for you and your significant other?

Should paid surrogacy be legal?

  • Yes, it should be legal for anyone (barring criminals)

    Votes: 14 56.0%

  • Yes, it should be legal but with exceptions (explain)

    Votes: 6 24.0%

  • No, it should be illegal for anyone (explain)

    Votes: 5 20.0%
  • Total voters
    25
Josie said:
I don't know all of the details on this, but I believe some states allow it. New York state government has proposed a bill to make it legal in their state. What say you? Should paid surrogacy be legal or illegal?
Click to expand...

Well...I was going to vote the top one but not sure why "barring criminals" was on there. Anyone should be able to enter into the voluntary contract for this.
 
Fishking said:
Well...I was going to vote the top one but not sure why "barring criminals" was on there. Anyone should be able to enter into the voluntary contract for this.
Click to expand...

Anyone? Even child molesters?
 
phattonez said:
Because poor, destitute women shouldn't be forced into selling their bodies (like with surrogacy and prostitution) just to survive. It's the same reason why they shouldn't be able to sell their labor below a certain amount. Poor people are exploitable, and if we legislate that people can contract to whatever they wish, then you are guaranteeing exploitation.
Click to expand...

It's their choice. If they choose to use their body in that way, it's their decision. If they choose to waitress or babysit or be a teacher's aide or secretary to survive, they can do that too.
 
Nap said:
Lol, In other words people are too stupid to make decisions for themselves so you must make the choice for them.

Just because you make a law doesn't make the practice go away, it simply pushes it underground making it even worse for those you believe you are protecting. Take prostitution for instance, there is no way to prevent it from taking place and any woman that is not averse to using her body to make money is now in a position that she is completely without legal recourse against some of the worst scum on the planet.
Click to expand...
Allowing someone to make a stupid decision isn't a good thing.
 
Fishking said:
Why would you have a law barring a voluntary transaction?
Click to expand...
Because there's no good reason to allow people to be taken advantage of.
 
Josie said:
It's their choice. If they choose to use their body in that way, it's their decision. If they choose to waitress or babysit or be a teacher's aide or secretary to survive, they can do that too.
Click to expand...
Why should it be legal for people to be taken advantage of? Why is that good for society?
 
phattonez said:
Allowing someone to make a stupid decision isn't a good thing.
Click to expand...

Why do you hate freedom?

Also, you aren't stopping them from making that decision. You are simply making it more dangerous for them.
 
phattonez said:
Why should it be legal for people to be taken advantage of? Why is that good for society?
Click to expand...

Why do you think women are stupid and can't make up their own mind what is best for their body?
 
Wouldn't a surrogate be considered pro- life/choice? What's wrong with that?
 
phattonez said:
This should absolutely be illegal. This is taking advantage of the poor for your own gain. I cannot imagine ripping a child away from a mother after childbirth. I know feminists like to use the woman as an incubator trope when discussing abortion, but in this instance that's absolutely what's going on.
Click to expand...

/// I cannot imagine ripping a child away from a mother after childbirth. /// So you are advocating that an imprisoned female inmate should be allowed to keep her child, raise that child in prison, and force the government to pay for the feeding, housing, clothing, and medical care for the child in a prison environment ?
 
Josie said:
Why do you think women are stupid and can't make up their own mind what is best for their body?
Click to expand...
This isn't an answer. Why should we let people make stupid decisions? Poor people will do so out of desperation.
 
JMR said:
I believe in New York, the birth mother retains legal rights to the child at birth. They can't sign away those rights beforehand. That's what is currently being legislated.
Click to expand...

Strongly agree!
 
phattonez said:
This isn't an answer. Why should we let people make stupid decisions? Poor people will do so out of desperation.
Click to expand...

Who says it's a stupid decision? Jeez, dude.
 
phattonez said:
This should absolutely be illegal. This is taking advantage of the poor for your own gain. I cannot imagine ripping a child away from a mother after childbirth. I know feminists like to use the woman as an incubator trope when discussing abortion, but in this instance that's absolutely what's going on.
Click to expand...

So women are too stupid or weak to make a decision for themselves? In their own best interests? :roll:
 
phattonez said:
Because it's exploitative. She's not freely consenting to it. She only chooses it out of necessity.

And besides, even if she freely consents, what of the right of the child to know his mother?
Click to expand...

She could be a waitress. She could work at the car wash. Etc etc. If she feels she wants 'more' $, who are you to tell her it's not ok?

And kids today are adopted all the time and dont have that right (some do, some dont). Who says that's even a right?
 
Nap said:
Seems like the law is conflating 2 seperate issues. I don't think the biological mother should be forced to give up her child should she change her mind. In the case of an actual surrogate where it is not her biological child then I would say the parental rights should go to the actual parents.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But then all monies must be given back to the parents who paid for the surrogacy. (That probably goes without saying)
 
phattonez said:
Psst, the decisions of the poor, especially those in debt, are basically all under duress.
Click to expand...

Who says the women that choose this are all poor?

And is any low-paying job that a poor person takes 'exploitation'? I mean, there certainly are alot of crappy jobs out there that unskilled people may get stuck with...is that 'exploitation?'
 
phattonez said:
The ones who do it or money don't do it out of compassion. With money not involved they're no longer selling their bodies.
Click to expand...

According to pro-life people, it's not her body she's selling.

In any case, I believe in legalized prostitution as well, which would be selling her 'personal assets.'
 
Josie said:
I don't know all of the details on this, but I believe some states allow it. New York state government has proposed a bill to make it legal in their state. What say you? Should paid surrogacy be legal or illegal?
Click to expand...

No one has ever been arrested or fined for paid surrogacy practices in NYS. I just think it should be done naturally, much more fun than using a cup.
 
phattonez said:
This isn't an answer. Why should we let people make stupid decisions? Poor people will do so out of desperation.
Click to expand...

Freedom for one to make decisions for themselves is much better than the tyranny of the majority even if you disagree with the choices they make.

Edit::
Should we make single motherhood illegal? Statistically, you could make an argument that it is a detriment to society on a macro level (that is not to say there aren't some great mothers out there able to take on that challenge, my mother was one) and in most cases a stupid decision.
 
Last edited:
phattonez said:
And there is always a connection between that child and what you call a living incubator.
Click to expand...

?? What connection? Are you saying if they never meet again, they are somehow connected by more than DNA?
 
phattonez said:
This should absolutely be illegal. This is taking advantage of the poor for your own gain. I cannot imagine ripping a child away from a mother after childbirth. I know feminists like to use the woman as an incubator trope when discussing abortion, but in this instance that's absolutely what's going on.
Click to expand...

When a relative or close friend agrees to act as a surrogate for a woman unable to carry a fetus to term, poverty does not come into play. Nor does it do so when someone does so out of the kindness of heart. Surrogates do not always seek remuneration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom