F4UCorsair Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'm not for or against the surrogate issue, but that's probably because I just don't understand homosexuality. If I take a giant step and (try to) accept it, I then don't understanf why they would want children. I do sometimes wonder if it's a minority group points scoring against 'the system' though, and what may be next. I don't accept that homosexuality and paedophilia are necessarily connected, but there does seem to be a disproportionate number of pedophiles who are male and prefer young males/male children. I wonder about same sex couples raising children and the environmental influence. It is said that one is born homoexual, but environmental issues must surely influence a child's development?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven23 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I support gay people, but this is not acceptable!! I have my own child but I would never go in some country as thailand, and india to find incubator wife, NEVER, it is highly unethical and repulsive to me. I hope court and justice system in chatuchak are strong enough to not let this happen!!!! Going abroad for surrogate services is often done by infertile heterosexual couples as well.You're confusing the issues. When this contract was set up, what they were doing was not explicitly illegal in Thailand. The laws have been changed since then, but that is NOT what THIS case is about. This case is about the custody of the child being contested. If the surrogate mother was not contesting the custody, the baby would long ago out of Thailand and living with her obviously very loving and dedicated same sex parents. Dear, I understand that, and it doesnt make them less guilty, even if they were heterosexual couple I dont approve this kind of practice, you remember that Australian couple that ditched down syndrome baby?? Anyway, I cannot imagine why would someone go here, in my country and all around europe ( mostly) fertilization and artificial insemination is for free and most couple are provided with free services and counseling, because you know, Europe is declining with children and they need this measure, although I dont know how is in USA and Australi, but if it expensive for them to have surrogate there???? why would they want to parents on first place??? They will not have money for children future!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Cahill Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'm not for or against the surrogate issue, but that's probably because I just don't understand homosexuality. If I take a giant step and (try to) accept it, I then don't understanf why they would want children. I do sometimes wonder if it's a minority group points scoring against 'the system' though, and what may be next. I don't accept that homosexuality and paedophilia are necessarily connected, but there does seem to be a disproportionate number of pedophiles who are male and prefer young males/male children. I wonder about same sex couples raising children and the environmental influence. It is said that one is born homoexual, but environmental issues must surely influence a child's development?? Reuters reported that New Life Surrogacy, Bangkok City Tower was closed down. Two years later, my friend went in there and saw that it was still open. Gays definitely aren't always paedophiles and are often very against it as they were often molested in their formative years and they consider it to have ruined or at least heavily influenced their lives. Most gays I know have had some kind of adverse experience when they're too young to know what to do about it. They would not want children as they aren't 'gay' or happy about their lives, and would rather be normal, but don't know how or have given up trying. This word 'gay' is divisive as many homosexuals are very upset a lot of the time and that's why so many of them kill themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 "Neither the surrogate mother who has said she wants to keep the baby, Patidta Kusolsang, nor her legal advisor, Verutai Maneenuchanert, were present today." Nothing to do with her. She was paid to carry someone else's child. She has no claim on the child. Now as to whether this type of surrogacy for money is right or wrong is another issue. Certainly seems to attract some greedy, averous individuals on both sides of the deal. If the egg is from her she is the biological mother of the child. Complete irrelevant who paid what. From the two fathers of the baby, only one can be the father, if I recall right how it works. And the right of the mother should be above the right of the father. If the egg is not hers that I am complete with you! I find these mail order baby culture very disturbing. It get common with superstars and rich to rent someone else womb, just to be more comfortable, making a baby a product that you can buy with money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) "Neither the surrogate mother who has said she wants to keep the baby, Patidta Kusolsang, nor her legal advisor, Verutai Maneenuchanert, were present today." Nothing to do with her. She was paid to carry someone else's child. She has no claim on the child. Now as to whether this type of surrogacy for money is right or wrong is another issue. Certainly seems to attract some greedy, averous individuals on both sides of the deal. If the egg is from her she is the biological mother of the child. Complete irrelevant who paid what. From the two fathers of the baby, only one can be the father, if I recall right how it works. And the right of the mother should be above the right of the father. If the egg is not hers that I am complete with you! I find these mail order baby culture very disturbing. It get common with superstars and rich to rent someone else womb, just to be more comfortable, making a baby a product that you can buy with money. From previous stories on this sad case I've read it appears to be the clear the egg is not hers. That is the premise my post was made upon. Edited October 31, 2015 by Bluespunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Cahill Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Bluspunk and Fairymuff, the sexual and morality police? Think very carefully why you won't be taken seriously in these matters. Why did not they do it in their own country?Who really is at fault?because homosexuals cannot adopt babies! they they are not satisfied with living their perverted lives (calling each other husband and wife even though both are man) don't know why they would want a baby anyway! For a moment I thought you were serious with this comment. Then I realised you're just trying to get a reaction because nobody would really want to make a complete fool of themselves with a comment like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Bluspunk and Fairymuff, the sexual and morality police? Think very carefully why you won't be taken seriously in these matters. Why did not they do it in their own country? Who really is at fault? because homosexuals cannot adopt babies! they they are not satisfied with living their perverted lives (calling each other husband and wife even though both are man) don't know why they would want a baby anyway! For a moment I thought you were serious with this comment. Then I realised you're just trying to get a reaction because nobody would really want to make a complete fool of themselves with a comment like that No idea why you mention me, however as I agree 100% with Fairynuff I'll respond. Judging by the tone of your post I see you are a narrow minded, right wing, homophobic bigot so I request you take your hate fuelled views and insert them somewhere where the sun fails to function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 recent research has shown homosexuality is not genetic it is environmental the poor child would be influenced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 recent research has shown homosexuality is not genetic it is environmental the poor child would be influenced Rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 recent research has shown homosexuality is not genetic it is environmental the poor child would be influenced Rubbish. sorry why do say that? is it the research or the influence that you are refuting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusV Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I follow the dialogs and would say, follow the nature ... is it possible? No, so its not ... Alternative, adopt a child, give him a "better" future and everybody is häppy. Edited October 31, 2015 by MusV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) As usual and predictable, this thread like most any thread that touches on gay issues (that isn't on the gay forum which is somewhat insulated) is just used as an excuse for rabid proudly IGNORANT homophobes to do a generic HATE dump having nothing to do with the SPECIFIC situation. Sickening, really. Edited October 31, 2015 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) recent research has shown homosexuality is not genetic it is environmental the poor child would be influenced Rubbish. sorry why do say that?is it the research or the influence that you are refuting? From this point on I'm going to regard all your posts to be nothing but BS. Edited October 31, 2015 by Bluespunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nottocus Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 because homosexuals cannot adopt babies! they they are not satisfied with living their perverted lives (calling each other husband and wife even though both are man) don't know why they would want a baby anyway! Two gay fathers and no mother for the little girl? Not in my book anyway. This whole thing is wrong on many levels, what the heck do "Immoral Gay Men" need with a daughter ? I am amazed at how sick the World is becoming !! Totally agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 because homosexuals cannot adopt babies! they they are not satisfied with living their perverted lives (calling each other husband and wife even though both are man) don't know why they would want a baby anyway! Two gay fathers and no mother for the little girl? Not in my book anyway. This whole thing is wrong on many levels, what the heck do "Immoral Gay Men" need with a daughter ? I am amazed at how sick the World is becoming !! Totally agree. My deepest condolences to you all. I can only hope you recover at some point in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairynuff Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Why this two blueboys not went to an orphanage and adopted a child from there ? I have not any sympathy with them sorry. They don't want your sympathy, they want you to understand that one of them is the biological father, but I doubt you'd have the ability to understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairynuff Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'm not for or against the surrogate issue, but that's probably because I just don't understand homosexuality. If I take a giant step and (try to) accept it, I then don't understanf why they would want children. I do sometimes wonder if it's a minority group points scoring against 'the system' though, and what may be next. I don't accept that homosexuality and paedophilia are necessarily connected, but there does seem to be a disproportionate number of pedophiles who are male and prefer young males/male children. I wonder about same sex couples raising children and the environmental influence. It is said that one is born homoexual, but environmental issues must surely influence a child's development?? Just about every aspect of your post is factually and statistically wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 who is the biological mother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairynuff Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 because homosexuals cannot adopt babies! they they are not satisfied with living their perverted lives (calling each other husband and wife even though both are man) don't know why they would want a baby anyway! Two gay fathers and no mother for the little girl? Not in my book anyway. This whole thing is wrong on many levels, what the heck do "Immoral Gay Men" need with a daughter ? I am amazed at how sick the World is becoming !! Totally agree. My deepest condolences to you all. I can only hope you recover at some point in the future. Bluespunk I admire your optimism, sadly I doubt those with limited intellect and understanding of humanity will ever recover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 recover? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callaway Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Why did not they do it in their own country? Who really is at fault? because homosexuals cannot adopt babies! they they are not satisfied with living their perverted lives (calling each other husband and wife even though both are man) don't know why they would want a baby anyway! This is a specific case. Homosexual love isn't on trial here. Custody of one baby is. Gay people can adopt in many countries. It is often harder. On surrogacy, gay and straight couples go to places like India and Nepal to save money, if it is legal in their home countries or not, just as people travel abroad for cheaper dental services. You can question the ethics of surrogacy but the ethics of surrogacy is not on trial here. ONE custody case is. Not all gay people want children, adopted or biological. Some do. What they call each other will depend on the individuals involved and really none of your business. Obviously for lesbians it is much easier to have a biological connection to children, from one member of the couple of course. Some people travel overseas to buy a baby. Same as some go to get dental work??? You are talking about a child not a rear molar. If they (Mummy and Daddy the 2 men) had the urge to be parents then go into a natural relationship and bear kids. If they choose that particular lifestyle then that is the consequences of their decision. Different if the couple were male and female and medical reasons they could not bear kids then I would see surrogacy as an alternative. But if 2 men choose that way then tough luck to them and should not be allowed children in their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Legality of surrogacy is a choice of all sovereign nations. Whether to extend that to foreigners is also their choice. Whether to extend that to same sex couple foreigners or single parent foreigners is also their choice. People are confused here. This topic isn't about the question of surrogacy legality. The contract signed was legal at the time in Thailand. The question now is whether that contract (which would not be legal now as the Thai law has changed) is to be honored, or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Cahill Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 They're at in Cambodia now. Pretend to shut it down in Thailand then do it somewhere else:http://www.smh.com.au/world/somebody-has-to-be-the-icebreaker-aussies-seeking-babies-turn-to-cambodia-20151027-gkjfj5.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patsycat Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I was hoping to read sympathy for this couple on this thread. The child was born in February, now they have to wait until next March. She has been living in hotel rooms, with her parents, all this time. The surrogate did not even turn up at the court. From what i have read she is not all that interested in Carmen. The egg donor did the DNA test, she and Mr Lake are the biological parents of Carmen. The surrogate was just a womb. Women have been doing this for decades for childless couples. Jeez, even Nicole Kidman used a surrogate for her youngest. But, what do i read. Homophobic, nasty comments. This is 2015, we do not live in the 1950's anymore. God help them, if any of your children grow up to be gay. With parents like you!! If you feel like, anyone nice that is, sign the petition - getcarmenhome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seastallion Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 "Neither the surrogate mother who has said she wants to keep the baby, Patidta Kusolsang, nor her legal advisor, Verutai Maneenuchanert, were present today." Nothing to do with her. She was paid to carry someone else's child. She has no claim on the child. Now as to whether this type of surrogacy for money is right or wrong is another issue. Certainly seems to attract some greedy, averous individuals on both sides of the deal. Unfortunately in this case it has a lot to do with her as the baby came out of her and she is the legal birth-mother on the birth certificate.What I am sure of is that after the birth she changed her mind upon realising that this beautiful (and possibly intelligent) luk kreung will be a big earner in 18 years time or earlier as a model or soap star. "My daughter khao suai maak." What an overtly racist comment. Since she is a Thai mother she must only be interested in the future ability to exploit the child. Your post is a great example of the racism that permeates this forum. No racism intended or expressed. Stereotyping, yes. Based on: Thai women being enthralled with white skinned Thais, and based on a fairly common predilection for grasping for money, and the number of luk kreung making a decent living with their looks or their brains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGareth2 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I was hoping to read sympathy for this couple on this thread. The child was born in February, now they have to wait until next March. She has been living in hotel rooms, with her parents, all this time. The surrogate did not even turn up at the court. From what i have read she is not all that interested in Carmen. The egg donor did the DNA test, she and Mr Lake are the biological parents of Carmen. The surrogate was just a womb. Women have been doing this for decades for childless couples. Jeez, even Nicole Kidman used a surrogate for her youngest. But, what do i read. Homophobic, nasty comments. This is 2015, we do not live in the 1950's anymore. God help them, if any of your children grow up to be gay. With parents like you!! If you feel like, anyone nice that is, sign the petition - getcarmenhome. human trafficking of the worst kind Edited October 31, 2015 by AGareth2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connda Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) "Neither the surrogate mother who has said she wants to keep the baby, Patidta Kusolsang, nor her legal advisor, Verutai Maneenuchanert, were present today." Nothing to do with her. She was paid to carry someone else's child. She has no claim on the child. Now as to whether this type of surrogacy for money is right or wrong is another issue. Certainly seems to attract some greedy, averous individuals on both sides of the deal. Unfortunately in this case it has a lot to do with her as the baby came out of her and she is the legal birth-mother on the birth certificate.What I am sure of is that after the birth she changed her mind upon realising that this beautiful (and possibly intelligent) luk kreung will be a big earner in 18 years time or earlier as a model or soap star. "My daughter khao suai maak." What an overtly racist comment. Since she is a Thai mother she must only be interested in the future ability to exploit the child. Your post is a great example of the racism that permeates this forum. The fact is, interestingly, that if you ask 100 Thais what the future would be like for their Euro/Thai mixed child, the prospects of an up-and-coming Thai superstar is not that far under the surface of most of their opinions. My wife would make (and has made) the same comment regarding if we had had children together, or if her son had married a farang woman instead of a Thai: "Oh, Thai farang baby so beautiful. Maybe make superstar when she get older." It's a common theme. I've heard similar comments from other Thai women. So you're insinuating that my Thai wife is racist? Against Europeans, maybe, because of her comments about Thai/farang children that echos Seastallion's comment? Or is Seastallion a racist because you assume that he's of European heritage an it's politically incorrect in your world for Caucasians of European decent to joke around about any other cultural other than Europeans? "Racist" is a knee-jerk word used by a certain political sub-culture of people to defame those they disagree with for lack of any other way to attack them. It's a pejorative and vitriolic word. And what you said, is defamation. And defamation in the Land of Smile has legal ramifications. Do be careful. Especially here in Thailand. Edited October 31, 2015 by connda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patsycat Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 So this couple, who live in Spain, who already have a son through surrogacy are human traficking? Jeez, get your heads out of the sand. Can your dirty little minds not even think that this loving couple (who are surrounded by an extended loving family back home) want to take their children back to their home and continue their, probably normal, mundane, life? Bringing their children up healthy and happy. I give up on trying to reason with blinkered, bigoted, old geezers. Let me ask a question. If i was a lesbian and neither I nor my lesbian wife could have children. So we looked at the possibilities and decided on surrogacy in Thailand. What would you say then? Or is it just because it is two men? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven23 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 No more anchor wombs!!! No more using and exploiting 3rd world women !!! stop this madness, I support gay rights and I think LGBT people should be aloud to get married, adopt. I am even ok with blind fertilisation, this is not a answer, I am totally against this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudcrab Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Bluspunk and Fairymuff, the sexual and morality police? Think very carefully why you won't be taken seriously in these matters. No idea why you mention me, however as I agree 100% with Fairynuff I'll respond. Judging by the tone of your post I see you are a narrow minded, right wing, homophobic bigot so I request you take your hate fuelled views and insert them somewhere where the sun fails to function. So you're basically saying "shove it up your bum".......how apt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts