Thursday, August 2, 2012
Alana Newman, the daughter of a sperm donor, explains her opposition to SSM through the lens of her concerns about the corresponding increase in the use of artificial reproductive technologies (ART):
Most people approve of gay couples adopting. I am one of these people. Adoption exists as an institution because of human frailty; sometimes people are unable to raise their biological children, but those children still need loving homes. Adoption is not a market that provides children to the adults that desire them. It is for parents to find children who—tragically—cannot be raised by their biological parents. . . . But there’s a big difference between ART and regular adoption. Donor-conception, unlike adoption, is a market where new humans are created to fulfill the demands of the adults that want them. “Commercially conceived” persons are deliberately denied a relationship with one or both of our biological parents. The tragic, primal wound ubiquitous in adoption literature is woven into every commercially conceived person’s life story.
The comment thread raises some interesting questions, including this: if ART is the problem, isn't opposition to SSM a wildly over- and under-inclusive proxy for addressing it?