Gay parents fight for custody with surrogate in Thailand

[Johnniey]

Welcome to my ignore list.

How pathetic that a person that must spend 90% of his life on this forum comes out with childish messages like this when someone calls you out for what you are.

You DON'T listen when anyone argues about the morality of two men having a baby - grow up.

[balo]

Funny how different this situation is from country to country .

In Norway we have a gay minister in the government , living in a family with adopted kids . They are doing well at school , are popular among friends , just like any other kids.

So what is the problem here? Two dads you might say , but if you can just look at the human aspect of it all you should not react in a negative way .

Especially in the west where people have a much higher living standard and education than in Thailand , a gay couple is a part of the society , they have the same rights in many countries today.

You don't have to like gay people yourself , or any other group you dislike , but these people are normal people , living in a normal world , with a family like the rest of us.

Get used to it or go back to your cave.

[Sawan Chan 7]

Two men having a family is normal, lol.

You are deluded if you think that.

Were you brought up by dope smoking brown rice eaters by any chance?

[balo]

Two men having a family is normal, lol.

You are deluded if you think that.

Were you brought up by dope smoking brown rice eaters by any chance?

Yes in Norway two men having a family is considered normal , even by law . Just like gay marriage . They are protected by the law.

You don't have to like it. As long as people are safe and happy I couldnt care less if their gay or straight.

Edited April 11, 2016 by balo

[Kaalle]

What it all boils down to is some silly primitive notion that gays are perverse sexual deviants that lead a turbulent and destructive life that shouldn't involve kids.

Basically people have no clue.

[Jingthing]

Welcome to my ignore list.

How pathetic that a person that must spend 90% of his life on this forum comes out with childish messages like this when someone calls you out for what you are.

You DON'T listen when anyone argues about the morality of two men having a baby - grow up.

Morality.

Schmorality.

Post garbage just to personally attack?

Ignore list for you too. Feels right.

[Jingthing]

What it all boils down to is some silly primitive notion that gays are perverse sexual deviants that lead a turbulent and destructive life that shouldn't involve kids.

Basically people have no clue.

Realistically, most same sex married couples are not going to have kids. A higher percentage of lesbians will, of course, easier biologically. I don't think most will want kids. But some do.

[Jingthing]

Two men having a family is normal, lol.

You are deluded if you think that.

Were you brought up by dope smoking brown rice eaters by any chance?

Yes in Norway two men having a family is considered normal , even by law . Just like gay marriage . They are protected by the law.

You don't have to like it. As long as people are safe and happy I couldnt care less if their gay or straight.

Normal is a loaded word. Obviously not the majority. Like left handed people. Etc.

[Jingthing]

What it all boils down to is some silly primitive notion that gays are perverse sexual deviants that lead a turbulent and destructive life that shouldn't involve kids.

Basically people have no clue.

People can have whatever personal views they like, secular or religious. Of course.

I may think people with orange hair look like orangutans. So what?

But IDEALLY in today's societies, there should be equal civil right under the LAW for all kinds of citizens, including GLBT people, and including GLBT parental rights.

Of course that's a target ... most nations aren't anywhere near that target. Including Thailand of course.

Surrogacy legality is a separate matter, not really a GLBT issue specifically at all.

There are other ways for GLBT to have kids without surrogacy, more so with lesbians, and many have them from previous relationships, etc.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[Kaalle]

I dont really reflect much on the politics. What I find more disturbing is the fact that some people are so quick in seeing these massive negative implications when it comes to the prospect of two parents being of the same sex. And then they deny the fact that they by doing this invariably assign gay people negative traits as a collective.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Kaalle

[Jingthing]

I dont really reflect much on the politics. What I find more disturbing is the fact that some people are so quick in seeing these massive negative implications when it comes to the prospect of two parents being of the same sex. And then they deny the fact that they by doing this invariably assign gay people negative traits as a collective.

Of course. Some GLBT people make wonderful parents, and some don't. The same as anyone.

[shunter]

Jingthing post # 251.

Of course. Some GLBT people make wonderful parents, and some don't. The same as anyone.

Could it be construed that in view of your ongoing ardent support of the males involved in the issue that you yourself you speak from a personal experience of being a parent?

Being as I have been honoured by the poster above of being placed upon his ignore list perhaps someone could ask him the same question who is not being ignored.

Ignorance they say is bliss. Protects ones from the harsh realities and hard facts of life known in the main as ''the truth.'' palatable or not.

Edited April 11, 2016 by shunter

[Sawan Chan 7]

Jingthing post # 251.

Of course. Some GLBT people make wonderful parents, and some don't. The same as anyone.

Could it be construed that in view of your ongoing ardent support of the males involved in the issue that you yourself you speak from a personal experience of being a parent?

Being as I have been honoured by the poster above of being placed upon his ignore list perhaps someone could ask him the same question who is not being ignored.

Ignorance they say is bliss. Protects ones from the harsh realities and hard facts of life known in the main as ''the truth.'' palatable or not.

Am easy way to avoid questions on a public forum.

He can answer it now if he had the balls, no pun intended.

As from his thousand of posts, I believe he is a single gay Pattaya dweller. Says it all really, certainly not in a position to make moral judgments.

[Jingthing]

My focus is civil rights for all citizens. Not going to entertain obviously trollish abusive baiting personal inquiries. So don't bother and also not relevant.

I assume rational readers can well understand why I would choose to ignore members who have a pattern of posting such personally oriented off topic trash.

The topics are the topics. Not the members.

With some exceptions like POTY award threads, topics that explicitly request personal feedback, etc.

This thread topic not an exception.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[shunter]

Civil rights of course do extend to young children and the need and the right to be in a balanced family unit mother and father agreed?

No child should be brought into this world as a designer child, ordered and paid for ''cash on delivery'' to satisfy the capricious whims of the people who ordered the ''goods in the first place irrespective of the sexual orientation of the people placing the order""

A child is not a product that one wheels out of a hospital ward as one wheels out a trolley load of shopping from Tesco Lotus etc.

My comments have never questioned the gender of those involved but the legal and moral aspect of the matter concerning all the parties involved in the issue.

In truth it is a case of ''mind over matter,'' you have a very biased vehement standpoint, thus your comments in truth are irrelevant and contribute nothing positive to the matter.

In short, regarding you overall standpoint regarding the issue. Nobody minds your comments as they do not matter..

Certainly being as I like others am on your ''ignore list'' it was interesting to see you so rapidly respond to the post made..

Edited April 11, 2016 by shunter

[Jingthing]

Am easy way to avoid questions on a public forum.

He can answer it now if he had the balls, no pun intended.

As from his thousand of posts, I believe he is a single gay Pattaya dweller. Says it all really, certainly not in a position to make moral judgments.

You are free to stereotype people based on your perception of their relationship status, sexual orientation, or residence location, etc. if you wish but I don't intend to waste my time with such moronic shallow tripe.

So another player for my ignore list. Only interested in communication with people who want to discuss TOPICS in a civil way, instead of personal attacks.

Yes I post a lot but it's so much better since I figured out the way to manage vicious personal snipers is to CUT THEM OUT.

Drives some of them batty, but who cares?

Edited April 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[Johnniey]

Am easy way to avoid questions on a public forum.

He can answer it now if he had the balls, no pun intended.

As from his thousand of posts, I believe he is a single gay Pattaya dweller. Says it all really, certainly not in a position to make moral judgments.

You are free to stereotype people based on your perception of their relationship status, sexual orientation, or residence location, etc. if you wish but I don't intend to waste my time with such moronic shallow tripe.

So another player for my ignore list. Only interested in communication with people who want to discuss TOPICS in a civil way, instead of personal attacks.

Yes I post a lot but it's so much better since I figured out the way to manage vicious personal snipers is to CUT THEM OUT.

Drives some of them batty, but who cares?

How do you know it drives them batty if you have ignored them?

[shunter]

One amusing aspect of the matter is that a poster puts on ignore those who ask pertinent questions concerning his experience of parenthood.Then the said ignoring person proceeds to lecture all and sundry about the benefits of and how to go about parenting as an all male couple.

Now is this from his own personal experiences?

If so why the reluctance to read and then respond to the questions ? There could be answers that could sway peoples opinion to a positive response concerning the issue of the father and mother (sic).

Or is it a diatribe aimed at those who disagree with the matter for various reasons and then the diatribes are aimed presumably to support the sexual preferences of the persons concerned, such a campaign being conducted under the cloak of political correctness?

​In a defense of a situation it is advisable and certainly beneficial that the main protagonists have personal experience of the matters involved in the issue. as opposed to a crusade conducted under a cloak of political correctness. Such a campaign has to be seen to be fair to all parties involved.

If the defender in the matter was to be put into a witness box the comments made would certainly do much damage to the couple and the child concerned and possibly even destroy the case .Ultimately all involved lose. the saddest victim being a designer child who is effectively in limbo and facing a very uncertain future.

The fault is with the system that allowed the whole issue in its many facets to develop as far as it has, Deceit on all sides along wit ignorance and to a degree a unhealthy disregard for the child's future and the law.

We see that there are already other children who are no doubt missing parenthood and a family life due to the issue.We should surely ask ourselves was deep consideration and a proper amount of thought put ito the issue from the start from all sides involved.

In my view no there was not, advantages were taken with all parties involved by financial inducement and latterly advantages are being sought by the use of emotional issues.

Those involved on all sides have acted in an irresponsible fashion as their actions have shown and current actions continue to show.

Sad to say the child is like a tennis ball being bounced around the court to secure an advantage and a match point and ultimately a victory legally as opposed to morally and common sense wise.

[Johnniey]

One amusing aspect of the matter is that a poster puts on ignore those who ask pertinent questions concerning his experience of parenthood.Then the said ignoring person proceeds to lecture all and sundry about the benefits of and how to go about parenting as an all male couple.

Now is this from his own personal experiences?

If so why the reluctance to read and then respond to the questions ? There could be answers that could sway peoples opinion to a positive response concerning the issue of the father and mother (sic).

Or is it a diatribe aimed at those who disagree with the matter for various reasons and then the diatribes are aimed presumably to support the sexual preferences of the persons concerned, such a campaign being conducted under the cloak of political correctness?

​In a defense of a situation it is advisable and certainly beneficial that the main protagonists have personal experience of the matters involved in the issue. as opposed to a crusade conducted under a cloak of political correctness. Such a campaign has to be seen to be fair to all parties involved.

If the defender in the matter was to be put into a witness box the comments made would certainly do much damage to the couple and the child concerned and possibly even destroy the case .Ultimately all involved lose. the saddest victim being a designer child who is effectively in limbo and facing a very uncertain future.

The fault is with the system that allowed the whole issue in its many facets to develop as far as it has, Deceit on all sides along wit ignorance and to a degree a unhealthy disregard for the child's future and the law.

We see that there are already other children who are no doubt missing parenthood and a family life due to the issue.We should surely ask ourselves was deep consideration and a proper amount of thought put ito the issue from the start from all sides involved.

In my view no there was not, advantages were taken with all parties involved by financial inducement and latterly advantages are being sought by the use of emotional issues.

Those involved on all sides have acted in an irresponsible fashion as their actions have shown and current actions continue to show.

Sad to say the child is like a tennis ball being bounced around the court to secure an advantage and a match point and ultimately a victory legally as opposed to morally and common sense wise.

I think he has a chip on his shoulder for never being asked to be a moderator, despite his desperate attempts to win awards for posting the most etc.

Some codependency issues are apparent.

[2fishin2]

Civil rights of course do extend to young children and the need and the right to be in a balanced family unit mother and father agreed?

No child should be brought into this world as a designer child, ordered and paid for ''cash on delivery'' to satisfy the capricious whims of the people who ordered the ''goods in the first place irrespective of the sexual orientation of the people placing the order""

A child is not a product that one wheels out of a hospital ward as one wheels out a trolley load of shopping from Tesco Lotus etc.

My comments have never questioned the gender of those involved but the legal and moral aspect of the matter concerning all the parties involved in the issue.

In truth it is a case of ''mind over matter,'' you have a very biased vehement standpoint, thus your comments in truth are irrelevant and contribute nothing positive to the matter.

In short, regarding you overall standpoint regarding the issue. Nobody minds your comments as they do not matter..

Certainly being as I like others am on your ''ignore list'' it was interesting to see you so rapidly respond to the post made..

Why are you referring to the person as a "designer child", as if the child had anything to do with with its birth. This is NOT what this thread is about. Fact of the matter is the child was born into a legal adoption arrangement (which happens all over the world in many countries) and now the mother has decided to not honor the contract. As I like to say this isnt rocket science break a contract pay a penalty. Its sad that in this instance its a child's life involved.

Jings comments matter much more than yours. You are trying to stir the pot and raise straw-man arguments. Jing isnt falling for it and you are trying your best into baiting him.

[shunter]

Your argument vigorous as it is sadly is flawed 2fishin2. You yourself state that the child is the most important issue which is what I have maintained all along from a legal standpoint.

We are not talking about contractual law we are talking about a child who has rights in the matter.

The mother has reneged it would seem on the contract and the two parents involved have been somewhat creative in the drawing up of the ''contract'' which has to a degree manipulated the laws of the land. The ''contract'' in fact has been disputed and is still open to dispute and in truth has about much worth as a used tissue.

As you rightly state it is not the child's fault she is designated a ''designer child'' or we could also state she is a human rent a womb child conceived for commercial purposes, those faults lie with the surrogate parents and the prospective adopters.Whatever view one takes the name tag will always be there.

The muddying of the waters by Jingthing and others is no more than a sensational climbing on the politically correct ''gay rights bandwagon by the hijacking and the diversion of the facts surrounding the matter.

It is very interesting to note that the two prospective parents do seem to have stayed away from this forum and this thread.

Now ask yourself why that may be? Certainly they have conducted their affairs concerning the matter elsewhere and rightly so under their own banner so to speak.

All this thread is is a determined crusade that is being conducted on some other persons warhorse to promote one persons and his allies point of view,.

That campaign being carried on here by parties not involved with the case (that includes the for and against groups too) may well do irreparable damage to the case of the two parents involved as well as the child who sadly everyone seems to forget, in truth she the child is being used as a bargaining point a flag to rally to without any consideration as to her welfare in both the short and long term.

Edited April 11, 2016 by shunter

[Jingthing]

True, designer child is way off base and intentionally inflammatory with obvious intention to demonize the same sex married couple.

That would indicate some kind of gene manipulation.

Here we have the father's sperm and the egg of a donor carried in a third party woman's womb.

No gene manipulation.

If there is a suggestion that choosing an "Asian" egg donor is gene manipulation. No it's not.

If you're needing an egg the egg is going to have a NATURAL ethnic background from the donor.

Not gene manipulation.

Any egg from any woman would naturally have an ethnic background of some kind. That's called human reproduction.

If a handsome Persian man marries a beautiful Ethiopian girl is that "gene manipulation" in order to produce exotic lovely babies.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Jingthing

[rgs2001uk]

He is a she and her name is Carmen.

Even the husband of the surrogate has said that he doesn't want her.

So, if this all goes tits up, where is she going to go? To some crappy orphanage? Ripped away from the only family she knows? This is not about her parents, this is about her. that wee thing.

Who is loved and in a loving family with extended loving aunties and grannies - to take that away from her would be terrible. She just needs to go home to be with her family.

The "womb" is not interested in the child. She just wants money.

Jeez, if i had a spare million dollars i would <deleted> give it to her. Just so she would sign the paper to give Carmen her passport.

You obviously have strong feelings on the subject, I am assume you are a woman (correct me if I am wrong).

Have you ever carried a child in your womb, given birth to it?

If you are indeed a woman and fell so strongly about it, why not put your womb out for rent for free.

No need for the million $$$$, just do it, you know it makes sense, you know you want to.

[Jingthing]

So any clues on WHEN there is going to be any news about the outcome of the case?

Next month?

Next year?
Never?

[lkv]

It is very interesting to note that the two prospective parents do seem to have stayed away from this forum and this thread.

Now ask yourself why that may be?

Hmm maybe they could not care less what some posters here think?

Edited April 11, 2016 by lkv

[lkv]

...

The "womb" is not interested in the child. She just wants money.

....

If you are indeed a woman and fell so strongly about it, why not put your womb out for rent for free.

No need for the million $$$$, just do it, you know it makes sense, you know you want to.

Some of you guys are really experts in twisting other people's words. Did it not occur to you that (if the poster is a female), maybe she would not rent her womb for free or for money, but understands that there are other women that will (purely for money)?

Her statement was that the mother is selling her womb for money, and you're telling her to do it herself for free?

Edited April 11, 2016 by lkv

[Jingthing]

My suggestion is IGNORE all personal baiting questions. They're not about serious debate. They're at a Trump-ish level and no need to stoop that low.

[lkv]

So should you. You have to understand that the majority of people accusing you of gay lobbying are pensioneers. It's a demographic that will not change their perception now. For 40-50 years they've heard homophobic tunes on TV all day long. I don't actually see the point in arguing with them.

I apologize if I sound patronizing to them, but that's just the way things are.

Not all are the same, different people have different perceptions, but I can understand where all those ideas are coming from.

Edited April 11, 2016 by lkv

[rgs2001uk]

...

The "womb" is not interested in the child. She just wants money.

....

If you are indeed a woman and fell so strongly about it, why not put your womb out for rent for free.

No need for the million $$$$, just do it, you know it makes sense, you know you want to.

Some of you guys are really experts in twisting other people's words. Did it not occur to you that (if the poster is a female), maybe she would not rent her womb for free or for money, but understands that there are other women that will (purely for money)?

Her statement was that the mother is selling her womb for money, and you're telling her to do it herself for free?

The hyprocrisy on this thread is amazing.

I have read that this girl is nothing more than "a womb for hire"

Utterly despicable language, what a way to refer to another human being.

Jeez, if I referred to the bargirls of Suk as nothing more than a XXXX for hire, I would be pulled up.

If I referred to the barboys of BoyzTown as nothing more than an XXX for hire I would be pulled up.

You are talking about this girl as if she is nothing more than an automaton, devoid of fellings and emotions.

I have had grown guys crying their hearts out in my office, because their girlfriend had an abortion, the same guys who had stated previously they never wanted children.

I have had women in my office asking for advice because they now found themselves pregnant.

Until any of us ever find ourselves in such a situation, none of us know how we will react..

We are talking about a human being here, lol, the irony of it all.

Not someone who is here to serve anyones political agenda, there are other forums on her for that.

Whats so funny about Peace Love & Understanding?

Talk about respect and acceptance, yet again the usual suspects hijack a thread to shove their own political agenda down our throats.

It pathetic.

[NCFC]

Your argument vigorous as it is sadly is flawed 2fishin2. You yourself state that the child is the most important issue which is what I have maintained all along from a legal standpoint.

We are not talking about contractual law we are talking about a child who has rights in the matter.

The mother has reneged it would seem on the contract and the two parents involved have been somewhat creative in the drawing up of the ''contract'' which has to a degree manipulated the laws of the land. The ''contract'' in fact has been disputed and is still open to dispute and in truth has about much worth as a used tissue.

As you rightly state it is not the child's fault she is designated a ''designer child'' or we could also state she is a human rent a womb child conceived for commercial purposes, those faults lie with the surrogate parents and the prospective adopters.Whatever view one takes the name tag will always be there.

The muddying of the waters by Jingthing and others is no more than a sensational climbing on the politically correct ''gay rights bandwagon by the hijacking and the diversion of the facts surrounding the matter.

It is very interesting to note that the two prospective parents do seem to have stayed away from this forum and this thread.

Now ask yourself why that may be? Certainly they have conducted their affairs concerning the matter elsewhere and rightly so under their own banner so to speak.

All this thread is is a determined crusade that is being conducted on some other persons warhorse to promote one persons and his allies point of view,.

That campaign being carried on here by parties not involved with the case (that includes the for and against groups too) may well do irreparable damage to the case of the two parents involved as well as the child who sadly everyone seems to forget, in truth she the child is being used as a bargaining point a flag to rally to without any consideration as to her welfare in both the short and long term.