Two Australian couples stopped from leaving Thailand with surrogate babies

[geodesic]

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

I agree that same sex couples should not be coming here to make children. Call me what you like.

Look at the recent case of the two gay males in Cairns who bought a baby boy in Russia, took him to Australia and made him their sex slave. And imagine how it must screw with the kids heads being bought up by two gays as their fathers.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

It is illegal for same sex couples to use the service of a surrogate in Thailand. For these gay couples to get the children out of Thailand they have to apply to Family Court to be deemed the parents which will take up to 6 months of red tape. Somehow I doubt that the Thai Family Court will deem them legal parents as the child was acquired illegally and the Court would only be supporting illegal activity if they do.

It is also illegal to use surrogacy for anyone outside of the family or close relative, I don't see Gammy's mum being charged yet however if we are going to be siting the rule of Thai law.....she should also be behind bars.

No, it is not currently illegal to use a surrogate, nor to be a surrogate for money. Gammy's mother can not be charged because she has not broken any Thai laws.

The doctor who performed the surrogacy *MAY* have his license revoked for an ethics violation, and the revoking of that license is the limit to which he can be charged.

There is no current law against surrogacy. Nobody will serve any jail time for anything related to surrogacy. It may be possible to bring some people up on charges of human trafficking, but that is a stretch and unlikely to yield a conviction.

[icare999]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

well sorry if it offends but i strongly feel same sex couples should not bring up children I have no objection to 2 adults living their gown lives as they please but no one can convince me its normal or natural I have no negative feelings aginst homosexuals tranvestities jews blacks or others and basically am indifferent to their life styles I know homosexuals, black jewish and arabs and dont mind a bit my children mixing with any of them in fact i think its good they do so that they know we are all humans but i think its plain wrong for a same sex couple to bring up children

[bangkoklasse]

Is it allowed to get surrogate babies in Australia for same sex couples?

[wilcopops]

Same sex 'male' couples should NOT be able to have any hand in bringing up a child. That child would almost certainly go through their school life and probably beyond being bullied relentlessly. They certainly would in my home country anyway, and that is a fact.

'Female' couples is a different story as you can't stop them having their own from a sperm donor.

If surrogacy is illegal within the borders of a certain country, then their citizens should NOT be allowed to just jump on a plane and exploit another country and bring the child back to the country where it is illegal. The child should be sent straight back to its natural mother and the couple involved prosecuted by the relevant laws as though they committed the crime within that country.

The surrogate involved in the baby Grammy case should be given her child back from Australia and have all the money removed from her, including the surrogacy revenue and charitable donations.

Her downs child is now being milked as a cash cow for all it is worth. Those clowns in Oz don't deserve to keep a dog let alone a child.

Edited to add.

A child is a human being and deserves to be brought up by its natuaral parents.... end of..... It is not a commodity to be bought, sold and traded over the internet or through agencies with baht signs in their eyes and no compassion for the human lives they affect.

Dreadful, dreadful business.

"Same sex 'male' couples should NOT be able to have any hand in bringing up a child. That child would almost certainly go through their school life and probably beyond being bullied relentlessly. They certainly would in my home country anyway, and that is a fact."

THAT IS A FACT!

[chooka]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

These are their children. Made with their sperm. Genetically theirs. Will you have them placed in an orphanage instead of with their parents?

"Their" sperm? I know gay couples share sperm. Did they mix thiers together to fertilise the egg? I never say to my wife your eggs are ours and my sperm is ours. My wife owns her eggs and I own my sperm and I am sure that gay couples individually own thiers. Hate to see a divorce where they fight over the rights of each others sperm.

Edited August 15, 2014 by chooka

[wilcopops]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

well sorry if it offends but i strongly feel same sex couples should not bring up children I have no objection to 2 adults living their gown lives as they please but no one can convince me its normal or natural I have no negative feelings aginst homosexuals tranvestities jews blacks or others and basically am indifferent to their life styles I know homosexuals, black jewish and arabs and dont mind a bit my children mixing with any of them in fact i think its good they do so that they know we are all humans but i think its plain wrong for a same sex couple to bring up children

" I have no negative feelings against............." - Really???

...and I love the way you LIUST those who you have "no negative feelings against" (or should that be "about")

Edited August 15, 2014 by wilcopops

[chooka]

Is it allowed to get surrogate babies in Australia for same sex couples?

"NO"

[bangkoklasse]

Is it allowed to get surrogate babies in Australia for same sex couples?

"NO"

If the answer is NO. Then it's wrong to get a surrogate baby in another country and bring back to Australia.

[GAZZPA]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

I would usually argue a point like this as i think people should be left to do as they please if they are not harming anyone,,, but I am inclined to agree with you on this.

I have often thought how the child would react to being raised by a same sex parentage. How it would effect their upbringing, how others would react to the child in school having same sex parents etc,, I am sure there are thousands of decent same sex couples who could put together a decent case for this but my gut tells me it isn't right.

Maybe one day it will be more accepted in society as gay people are generally more accepted nowadays (at least in any sensible and civilised society) but I am not sure it will. Sometimes things can just be wrong and this feels like one of those things.

Also, although I feel for the couples who cannot have their own babies I absolutely detest surrogate motherhood from foreigners in Thailand, I see it as exploitation of the poor. There are many orphans and children that need a home and loving parents, this is where they should be looking if they cannot have children by natural birth. There are 35 kids right now in an orphanage 10 minutes from my home aged from babies to 8 years old that have all been saved from trafficking, abuse, abandonment etc,, all need help. It sickens me that people do illegal things like this when they could do so much to help one of those children.

[Basil B]

Same sex 'male' couples should NOT be able to have any hand in bringing up a child. That child would almost certainly go through their school life and probably beyond being bullied relentlessly. They certainly would in my home country anyway, and that is a fact.

'Female' couples is a different story as you can't stop them having their own from a sperm donor.

If surrogacy is illegal within the borders of a certain country, then their citizens should NOT be allowed to just jump on a plane and exploit another country and bring the child back to the country where it is illegal. The child should be sent straight back to its natural mother and the couple involved prosecuted by the relevant laws as though they committed the crime within that country.

The surrogate involved in the baby Grammy case should be given her child back from Australia and have all the money removed from her, including the surrogacy revenue and charitable donations.

Her downs child is now being milked as a cash cow for all it is worth. Those clowns in Oz don't deserve to keep a dog let alone a child.

Edited to add.

A child is a human being and deserves to be brought up by its natuaral parents.... end of..... It is not a commodity to be bought, sold and traded over the internet or through agencies with baht signs in their eyes and no compassion for the human lives they affect.

Dreadful, dreadful business.

"A child is a human being and deserves to be brought up by its natural parents.... "

surrogacy... nothing natural about it, the idea of homosexuality sickens me but we accept it as long as it is not "in our faces", but it is impossible for them to conceive naturally , only one could be the biological parent so why can they not accept they should never have children, why should a child have to be brought up in a in a unnatural parental relationship?

I say "A child is a human being and deserves to be brought up by its natural normal parents.... "

[ravip]

Hmmmm!!! Another ban placed on something without thinking about the repercussions.

Can it be done by any foreigner in your own country easily?

[chooka]

Just saw a news report on this by ABC T.V Australia apparently there are around 100 Australian couples currently involved in surrogacy in Thailand and around 70% of those couples are gay. India closed it's doors to same sex couples using surrogates so many move to Thailand. Thailand is a huge business for surrogacy for the gay community around the world.

[marquess]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

So Keith, let me get this right. Same sex partners cannot have babies naturally, so they should not reproduce.

I am infertile, and therefore unable to reproduce....so since I cannot have a baby myself I should not have a surrogate?

Incidentally, I am a lesbian too, so I guess that is a double whammy in your book??

If you are infertile what part of any surrogate child would be your own biologically (emotional attachments aside)? Surely Nature has ordained that for humans two sexes are required to produce offspring; should the authorities wish to reflect this in their laws, they can hardly be called discriminatory. If same sex couples wish to produce offspring via surrogacy then surely such a process should be undertaken in a country where such a procedure is legal?

[bangkoklasse]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

So Keith, let me get this right. Same sex partners cannot have babies naturally, so they should not reproduce.

I am infertile, and therefore unable to reproduce....so since I cannot have a baby myself I should not have a surrogate?

Incidentally, I am a lesbian too, so I guess that is a double whammy in your book??

If you are infertile what part of any surrogate child would be your own biologically (emotional attachments aside)? Surely Nature has ordained that for humans two sexes are required to produce offspring; should the authorities wish to reflect this in their laws, they can hardly be called discriminatory. If same sex couples wish to produce offspring via surrogacy then surely such a process should be undertaken in a country where such a procedure is legal?

But if it's illegal to do it in your own country. It's not right to go to another country and buy a surrogate baby, and then go back to your home country with the baby!!

[Mudcrab]

No, it is not currently illegal to use a surrogate, nor to be a surrogate for money. Gammy's mother can not be charged because she has not broken any Thai laws.

The doctor who performed the surrogacy *MAY* have his license revoked for an ethics violation, and the revoking of that license is the limit to which he can be charged.

There is no current law against surrogacy. Nobody will serve any jail time for anything related to surrogacy. It may be possible to bring some people up on charges of human trafficking, but that is a stretch and unlikely to yield a conviction.

Partially true.

The surrogacy laws are there and are humane.

Surrogacy can be used but only between blood relatives. So a woman may help (be the surrogate) for her brother and his wife if the brothers wife has problems and carry the baby for them,for example.

Other than that, surrogacy is not legal in Thailand.

[bangkokpoppys]

Ah! so now the crap has hit the fan they are stopping them at the Airport! I hope the initial breach and how it happened is being investigated otherwise it is just knee jerk reaction to a cover up!

It is also against Thai Human Trafficking laws and the country is under huge pressure internationally to stamp out human trafficking. Add this and the huge international attention Thailand is receiving in regards to baby Gammy and the Junta is going to act. I don't think this will just be a simple knew jerk reaction. I saw on Australian Television news this morning that all people with young children are being checked for proof of parentage.

Correct.

This is a breach of Thai law and cannot be allowed to continue until a considered change or non change of the law is approved.

What crap.

Edited August 15, 2014 by bangkokpoppys

[simple1]

Is it allowed to get surrogate babies in Australia for same sex couples?

No matter your sexual orientation, commercial surrogacy is illegal within Australia. Australians have been circumventing Australian law by paying for commercial surrogacy in Thailand, or any other country, then arranging for citizenship by descent to bring the child back to Australia.

[seajae]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

Homophobic is a term introduced by gays in an attempt to belittle or pressure anyone that has a different opinion to theirs be it about children or marriage. Everyone is entitled to live their own lives as they see fit, if they prefer their own sex then that is their choice and no-one can take that away from them. One thing they must also accept is that it is physically impossible for them to have their own children by each other, by going into their relationship this needs to be a part of what they want. If they have children through previous hetero relationships then they are able to fulfill their child raising problems but to claim they are entitled to invitro fertilization is a fallacy. This is not the same as hetero couples as they do have the required body parts to have children and are stopped only to a technicality that can be overcome by science, being either both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce. My eldest daughter is gay and I have had many gay friends over the years but I do not believe they have a right to this type of endeavour, it does not make me a "homophobe", just someone with an opinion . Trying to make people out to be something they are not to push your own bias is the problem, if you honestly believe you are entitled then try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible due to not have the correct reproductive organs between them and stop belittling anyone with a different opinion. It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other.

[khunken]

It's a pity that the discussion has been hijacked by the same sex couple not being allowed to have babies, surrogate or adopted, attitude. I disagree with this, as one poster put it, bigoted attitude. Note - I am hetero. It reminds me of the RC church's teaching that using condoms is not 'natural'. There's an awful lot of 'not natural' aids to injured and disabled people that help give them a decent life.

Pedos come in every shape & form, hetero & homo and there's no evidence I've seen that one is more prevalent than the other. Certainly convicted pedos, whatever their orientation, should not be allowed to adopt or 'adopt' a surrogate.

Given the number of failed marriages and relationships, there are a huge number of children being brought up by single parents (often male) in western countries. Having two male or female parents sounds like being better (than one) for the children to me.

The cases under the microscope now are couples using other countries and non-related surrogate mothers to buy their babies. The Thai authorities are right to put a stop to this as it does smack of trafficking. The other (related?) case of a 'baby-factory' is still being investigated as it seems to come under the trafficking description too.

For once there seems to be a real crack-down on an illegal activity here.

[AyG]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

Homophobic is a term introduced by gays in an attempt to belittle or pressure anyone that has a different opinion to theirs be it about children or marriage. Everyone is entitled to live their own lives as they see fit, if they prefer their own sex then that is their choice and no-one can take that away from them. One thing they must also accept is that it is physically impossible for them to have their own children by each other, by going into their relationship this needs to be a part of what they want. If they have children through previous hetero relationships then they are able to fulfill their child raising problems but to claim they are entitled to invitro fertilization is a fallacy. This is not the same as hetero couples as they do have the required body parts to have children and are stopped only to a technicality that can be overcome by science, being either both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce. My eldest daughter is gay and I have had many gay friends over the years but I do not believe they have a right to this type of endeavour, it does not make me a "homophobe", just someone with an opinion . Trying to make people out to be something they are not to push your own bias is the problem, if you honestly believe you are entitled then try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible due to not have the correct reproductive organs between them and stop belittling anyone with a different opinion. It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other.

First try to get your facts straight. The term "homophobic" was created by George Weinberg, a straight psychotherapist.

And for people who "prefer their own sex" is not "their choice"; it's not a choice at all. It's an intrinsic characteristic.

As for "both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce", what do you mean by "meant"? Do you believe in some invisible sky fairy who decides what is "meant" and what isn't "meant"?

You write "try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible". How about changing that to "try giving sound reasons that 2 different sex people should be able to reproduce even though the invisible sky fairy has resolved that for them it is to be physically impossible".

However, thank you for patronising me by writing "It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other." I happen to be half of one of those "gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce". Personally, I am happy not to have children. However, if others feel that their lives would be enriched by raising and nurturing a child or children, who am I (or anybody else) to say no? Given the sh*tty ways that many children of straight couples and single parents are brought up, I would posit it's far better for children to be brought up by a couple who love, care for, and nurture the child irrespective of their sexuality and gender than to be brought up by uncaring individuals or couples of any sexual orientation.

[webfact]

Aussie couple with 'surrogate' baby refused exit from Thailand

BANGKOK, August 15, 2014 (AFP) - A gay Australian couple have been stopped from leaving Thailand with a baby for having incomplete documents for the infant, immigration police said Friday, in the latest twist in a widening surrogacy scandal in the kingdom.

The men were trying to leave for Singapore through the capital's main international airport on Thursday.

Immigration police official, Major General Suwichpol Imjairach, said it was unclear if the baby had been born to a Thai surrogate mother.

"They didn't have documents to prove that the father is the child's legal guardian... so we asked them to get the document from the court," he told AFP, adding they were the only couple to be stopped at the airport so far.

Australian media have reported that the men were one of four foreign couples to be stopped leaving Thailand with surrogate babies over recent days.

The kingdom has been at the centre of surrogacy scandal since a Thai woman said she was paid around $15,000 to carry a baby for a different Australian couple, who she alleged then rejected a boy born with Down syndrome -- but took his twin sister.

David Farnell, 56, and his wife have denied leaving the boy, called Gammy, with the surrogate mother. Farnell is a convicted sex offender.

Thai authorities last week also found nine babies in a plush Bangkok condo, all apparently born to surrogate mothers but with the same Japanese father, prompting the kingdom's military rulers to vow to tighten its surrogacy laws.

Over the last few days officials have raided a number of IVF clinics in Bangkok and a surrogacy bill is likely to be fast-tracked through the new National Legislative Assembly over coming weeks.

The law will ban women from carrying babies for commericial purposes and restrict surrogacy to relatives. It threatens anyone found in breach with 10 years in jail and fine.

There are fears foreigners currently waiting for surrogate babies to be born in Thailand could be snared by any tightening of the law.

Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on Thursday said it could not confirm if any of its citizens had been refused exit from Thailand for "privacy reasons".

While acknowledging surrogacy laws in Thailand are "a matter for Thailand" a department spokeswoman called for "transitional arrangements" for any new rules to help any affected Australians.

The US Embassy in Bangkok also said it is "engaging Thai government officials" over the potential impact on US citizens who have already entered into surrogacy agreements in the kingdom.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2014-08-15

[Bluespunk]

Why are same sex men creating babies. Just adopt.

If homosexuals want to live as they do they should accept that their choice means that babies should never, and will never, be part of it.

If they want children so desperately maybe they should get wives or girlfriends.

Why?

If they offer a loving, safe home environment where's the problem?

[Bluespunk]

"The ruling army general does not want Thailand to be a surrogacy hub"

That's a first. Someone not wanting Thailand to be a hub.

Strange days, indeed.

[frollywolly]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

keith101 has no concern for the future welfare of the children, nor who will make good parents.

Pathetic really

[Payboy]

The ruling army general does not want Thailand to be a surrogacy hub

This is not good for my Hubba Hubba post count.

[deknoiJT]

First try to get your facts straight. The term "homophobic" was created by George Weinberg, a straight psychotherapist.

And for people who "prefer their own sex" is not "their choice"; it's not a choice at all. It's an intrinsic characteristic.

As for "both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce", what do you mean by "meant"? Do you believe in some invisible sky fairy who decides what is "meant" and what isn't "meant"?

You write "try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible". How about changing that to "try giving sound reasons that 2 different sex people should be able to reproduce even though the invisible sky fairy has resolved that for them it is to be physically impossible".

However, thank you for patronising me by writing "It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other." I happen to be half of one of those "gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce". Personally, I am happy not to have children. However, if others feel that their lives would be enriched by raising and nurturing a child or children, who am I (or anybody else) to say no? Given the sh*tty ways that many children of straight couples and single parents are brought up, I would posit it's far better for children to be brought up by a couple who love, care for, and nurture the child irrespective of their sexuality and gender than to be brought up by uncaring individuals or couples of any sexual orientation.

Great post.

[khunken]

The ruling army general does not want Thailand to be a surrogacy hub

This is not good for my Hubba Hubba post count.

My sympathies.

They can always make it a no-surrogacy hub.

[Baerboxer]

stopping same sex couples from taking babies out of the country is good.i have no problem with people having a same sex partner but do not believe they should come here looking to get children they cannot have naturally.basicly same sex partners cannot have babies with each other and therefore cannot have children.i am not religious at all but do believe in the natural order of life.

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

Homophobic is a term introduced by gays in an attempt to belittle or pressure anyone that has a different opinion to theirs be it about children or marriage. Everyone is entitled to live their own lives as they see fit, if they prefer their own sex then that is their choice and no-one can take that away from them. One thing they must also accept is that it is physically impossible for them to have their own children by each other, by going into their relationship this needs to be a part of what they want. If they have children through previous hetero relationships then they are able to fulfill their child raising problems but to claim they are entitled to invitro fertilization is a fallacy. This is not the same as hetero couples as they do have the required body parts to have children and are stopped only to a technicality that can be overcome by science, being either both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce. My eldest daughter is gay and I have had many gay friends over the years but I do not believe they have a right to this type of endeavour, it does not make me a "homophobe", just someone with an opinion . Trying to make people out to be something they are not to push your own bias is the problem, if you honestly believe you are entitled then try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible due to not have the correct reproductive organs between them and stop belittling anyone with a different opinion. It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other.

First try to get your facts straight. The term "homophobic" was created by George Weinberg, a straight psychotherapist.

And for people who "prefer their own sex" is not "their choice"; it's not a choice at all. It's an intrinsic characteristic.

As for "both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce", what do you mean by "meant"? Do you believe in some invisible sky fairy who decides what is "meant" and what isn't "meant"?

You write "try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible". How about changing that to "try giving sound reasons that 2 different sex people should be able to reproduce even though the invisible sky fairy has resolved that for them it is to be physically impossible".

However, thank you for patronising me by writing "It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other." I happen to be half of one of those "gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce". Personally, I am happy not to have children. However, if others feel that their lives would be enriched by raising and nurturing a child or children, who am I (or anybody else) to say no? Given the sh*tty ways that many children of straight couples and single parents are brought up, I would posit it's far better for children to be brought up by a couple who love, care for, and nurture the child irrespective of their sexuality and gender than to be brought up by uncaring individuals or couples of any sexual orientation.

Interesting response. You are happy to belittle anyone who believes in any form of religion, fate, or whatever whilst not allowing them a view about homsexual couples having the right to purchase children.

"The invisible sky fairy" - you might be atheist but why belittle those that aren't? This is about the natural biological functions of the male and females of the species to reproduce. Homosexuals can't do that and baby buying and trafficking is, as we can see here, not the answer.

Your suggestion that all homosexuals are loving, caring and would make perfect parents compared to hetrosexual couples is based on what? Surely not a bias to those with your own sexual preference. Next, you'll be claiming homosexuals are all model citizens in every country in the world.

[JAFO]

This whole deal is really quite disturbing. One thing I did not see mentioned is a background check on the "parents" prior to release. Showing legal documents that the Mom agrees to let it go is simply not enough. I suspect many children are going to be sent off into some real poor life situations. I suspect most dont adopt because the process digs deeper. Again this boils down to foreigners exploiting a country with poor controls.

I am glad they are stopping it and support it 100%. Make it harder. Unfortunately however the foreigners will move onto to another country. I call Thailand "Home" but it is hard to have to constantly fend off the negative press it gets with poor behaving foreigners.

[khunken]

Do you also have a problem with infertile heterosexual couples having children? Or are you just a homophobic bigot?

Homophobic is a term introduced by gays in an attempt to belittle or pressure anyone that has a different opinion to theirs be it about children or marriage. Everyone is entitled to live their own lives as they see fit, if they prefer their own sex then that is their choice and no-one can take that away from them. One thing they must also accept is that it is physically impossible for them to have their own children by each other, by going into their relationship this needs to be a part of what they want. If they have children through previous hetero relationships then they are able to fulfill their child raising problems but to claim they are entitled to invitro fertilization is a fallacy. This is not the same as hetero couples as they do have the required body parts to have children and are stopped only to a technicality that can be overcome by science, being either both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce. My eldest daughter is gay and I have had many gay friends over the years but I do not believe they have a right to this type of endeavour, it does not make me a "homophobe", just someone with an opinion . Trying to make people out to be something they are not to push your own bias is the problem, if you honestly believe you are entitled then try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible due to not have the correct reproductive organs between them and stop belittling anyone with a different opinion. It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other.

First try to get your facts straight. The term "homophobic" was created by George Weinberg, a straight psychotherapist.

And for people who "prefer their own sex" is not "their choice"; it's not a choice at all. It's an intrinsic characteristic.

As for "both women or both men gay couples were never meant to be able to reproduce", what do you mean by "meant"? Do you believe in some invisible sky fairy who decides what is "meant" and what isn't "meant"?

You write "try giving sound reasons that 2 same sex people should be able to reproduce even though it is physically impossible". How about changing that to "try giving sound reasons that 2 different sex people should be able to reproduce even though the invisible sky fairy has resolved that for them it is to be physically impossible".

However, thank you for patronising me by writing "It does a great dis-service to those gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce due to their partner choice and have chosen their partners due entirely to the love of each other." I happen to be half of one of those "gay couples that accept that they are not able to reproduce". Personally, I am happy not to have children. However, if others feel that their lives would be enriched by raising and nurturing a child or children, who am I (or anybody else) to say no? Given the sh*tty ways that many children of straight couples and single parents are brought up, I would posit it's far better for children to be brought up by a couple who love, care for, and nurture the child irrespective of their sexuality and gender than to be brought up by uncaring individuals or couples of any sexual orientation.

Interesting response. You are happy to belittle anyone who believes in any form of religion, fate, or whatever whilst not allowing them a view about homsexual couples having the right to purchase children.

"The invisible sky fairy" - you might be atheist but why belittle those that aren't? This is about the natural biological functions of the male and females of the species to reproduce. Homosexuals can't do that and baby buying and trafficking is, as we can see here, not the answer.

Your suggestion that all homosexuals are loving, caring and would make perfect parents compared to hetrosexual couples is based on what? Surely not a bias to those with your own sexual preference. Next, you'll be claiming homosexuals are all model citizens in every country in the world.

Normally Baerboxer you write good posts but this is not one of them.

He didn't belittle anyone but was responding to, frankly, a bigoted post that actually did belittle others. I also didn't see any support for 'the right to purchase children' which is wrong for any couple, hetero or homo, to do. And no support for trafficking either.

That's a number of straw men you've created. Another one is 'all homosexuals' which he didn't say - your creation.

You don't seem to have grasped the point that there is no evidence - none, nada - that same sex couples are not just as capable of providing a loving environment for any child. There is also no reason that they shouldn't be allowed to adopt or have a surrogate, provided it's done legally.

BTW the topic is couples, of any sexual orientation, not being allowed to circumvent laws to take children out of Thailand - a form of trafficking that is wrong in itself. It should also be pointed out that the pedo, hetero father seriously compounded the wrong-doing.