Without reading the article, what's wrong with surrogacy? As a man, if I wanted children, this would definitely a way that I would consider going about it. Pay a woman to have my child, likely conceived through in-vitro fertilization, and have her renounce all claims to parentage for it. And then potentially find a long-term girlfriend or wife, now that they would have no claim whatsoever over the child and wouldn't be able to threaten me with taking them away from me for cash and prizes.
I don't care much for Christiano Ronaldo, but I will always respect him for going about it this way. He knew that as a millionaire (or is he a billionaire?), women would try to parasitize him for his money through any means necessary, so he took steps ahead of time to avoid the worst case scenario.
Just snipping the relevant portion of the declaration, here is the statement:
Surrogacy
The Church also takes a stand against the practice of surrogacy, through which the immensely worthy child becomes a mere object. On this point, Pope Francis’s words have a singular clarity: “The path to peace calls for respect for life, for every human life, starting with the life of the unborn child in the mother’s womb, which cannot be suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking. In this regard, I deem deplorable the practice of so-called surrogate motherhood, which represents a grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child, based on the exploitation of situations of the mother’s material needs. A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract. Consequently, I express my hope for an effort by the international community to prohibit this practice universally.”[92]
First and foremost, the practice of surrogacy violates the dignity of the child. Indeed, every child possesses an intangible dignity that is clearly expressed—albeit in a unique and differentiated way—at every stage of his or her life: from the moment of conception, at birth, growing up as a boy or girl, and becoming an adult. Because of this unalienable dignity, the child has the right to have a fully human (and not artificially induced) origin and to receive the gift of a life that manifests both the dignity of the giver and that of the receiver. Moreover, acknowledging the dignity of the human person also entails recognizing every dimension of the dignity of the conjugal union and of human procreation. Considering this, the legitimate desire to have a child cannot be transformed into a “right to a child” that fails to respect the dignity of that child as the recipient of the gift of life.[93]
Surrogacy also violates the dignity of the woman, whether she is coerced into it or chooses to subject herself to it freely. For, in this practice, the woman is detached from the child growing in her and becomes a mere means subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others. This contrasts in every way with the fundamental dignity of every human being and with each person’s right to be recognized always individually and never as an instrument for another.
Edit: While their statement doesn't mention it directly, and would also condemn the case you have brought up, it should probably be noted that what has brought surrogacy as a controversial topic into the public consciousness lately is specifically high profile gay male couples purchasing baby boys through surrogacy.
Without reading the article, what's wrong with surrogacy? As a man, if I wanted children, this would definitely a way that I would consider going about it. Pay a woman to have my child, likely conceived through in-vitro fertilization, and have her renounce all claims to parentage for it. And then potentially find a long-term girlfriend or wife, now that they would have no claim whatsoever over the child and wouldn't be able to threaten me with taking them away from me for cash and prizes.
I don't care much for Christiano Ronaldo, but I will always respect him for going about it this way. He knew that as a millionaire (or is he a billionaire?), women would try to parasitize him for his money through any means necessary, so he took steps ahead of time to avoid the worst case scenario.
Just snipping the relevant portion of the declaration, here is the statement:
Edit: While their statement doesn't mention it directly, and would also condemn the case you have brought up, it should probably be noted that what has brought surrogacy as a controversial topic into the public consciousness lately is specifically high profile gay male couples purchasing baby boys through surrogacy.
To play the advocate most infernal ...
I have issue with the point as stated in paragraph 48. Was not Mary, in fact, the surrogate of God, the Father?
Is not St. Joseph venerated as the "Holy Stepfather"?