9 October 2016

Special Edition 169

The Coober Pedy News features quotations from publications which reveal the real stories
behind the mainstream media headlines, and which offer a carefully researched Christian viewpoint on current
issues affecting Australian society.

The Coober Pedy News is online only and not published as a newspaper.
Click here for the local Coober Pedy newspaper.


0427 815 561

Previous Issues   TV, Radio Programs   10-day Weather forecast for Coober Pedy   512km composite Woomera Radar Loop   Map of Coober Pedy  

A visit to a baby market in Brussels

A donor-conceived Belgian woman visits a fair for same-sex couples who want to be dads

Stephanie Raeymaekers, Oct 4 2016
(Reproduced by permission)

For the second time around a surrogacy fair organised by the American company Men Having Babies landed on Belgian soil.
This time it took place in a slightly more upscale venue. The ground floor at The Brussels Hilton became a stage where 220 potential
customers from 12 European countries were welcomed.
Like last year, I was present. Me: the first in our generation to provide adults with a semi-biological child. It was the start
of a lucrative business when fertility doctors discovered that the techniques used on a pig farm could also be useful for infertile
heterosexual couples.
From the 1950s Belgian wombs were being filled with the sperm of unknown men. Fertility techniques improved and not much later they tapped
into new target groups: single women and lesbian couples.
Branding unwanted childlessness as discrimination and injustice, several branches of the LGBT community are lobbying for gay men and
transgender women to have biological children of their own.
Last Sunday almost everything was on offer: interpreters, gadgets, price lists, different formulas, the dos and the don’ts. But most
of all, straight-to-your-heart-and-into-our-wallet sales pitches from companies which are able to connect anyone directly with
eggs, surrogacy agencies and lawyers to make “a dream come true”. Lawyers handed out the metaphorical road map with instructions on how to
by-pass laws to get your purchased child(ren) “legally” in your own country.
Towards an ethical framework
This year Men Having Babies also presented an “ethical framework” to convince opponents of their sincere and honest intentions. They claim
to be a non-profit organization aiming to provide tools and means for gay men to pursue their right to have a biological family. The fact that
their biggest sponsors happened to be the very fertility centers and law firms that pitched to the 220 attendees wasn’t viewed as
a conflict of interest.
Surrogacy was described as “the act of a woman, altruistic by nature, gestating a child for another individual or couple, with the
intent to give the child to the intended parents at birth”.
I have a very different perspective. I would describe it as the outsourcing of a personalized pregnancy that aims the trading/adoption of
a donor-conceived child to those who ordered it whilst paying a fee for expenses.
New terms were launched to keep the transactions as business-like as possible: the surrogate mother was called “a carrier”, the
egg donor “a genetic material contributor”. Some agencies also offered a money-back guarantees(no kidding) and
“Multiple Cycle Package” deals.
Several times speakers advised against adoption. They said that nowadays there are not many young children to adopt and the probability that
the mother may decide to keep “your” child is too great a risk. Surrogacy, once again, brought salvation.
Speakers strongly advised the participants to use eggs from a woman other than the surrogate, because the birth mother will then be more
likely to give up the baby.
An enforceable 50-page contract also offers reassurance that you can take the child home with you after it is born. The contract even
allows payments to stop if the surrogate does not comply with the terms of the contract. I must also mention that many contracts have a
non-disclosure clause: they prohibit women from speaking publicly about any malpractice they endured.
A lot of time and attention was spent on the topic of conceiving as healthy a child as possible. Gender selection is included in
this “service”. My consternation was huge when a fertility doctor asked the audience who would chose to abort a child with a
defect. Most hands went in the air. Just for the record: abortion can also be enforced by contract.
Belgian hypocrisy
Apart from “I want my child to be as healthy and perfect as possible”, discussion of the welfare of the child was – as it is in Belgium – limited to
the legal uncertainty that is created when there is a legal conflict between genetic lineage and legal parenthood. Only twice (and very briefly) was
the right of the child to knowledge of his or her ancestry and identity mentioned. But these were immediately countered by economic and
practical arguments.
Once again certain Belgian politicians have sought the media limelight to express their personal disgust regarding this event. Yet their dismay is
hypocritical. They refuse to acknowledge that similar practices are taking place all the time in IVF clinics with the same ethical framework to
justify them. Apparently a policy is ethical when the price is low, transparency is not needed and fancy brochures are not being handed out.
An ethicist once told me that something is not ethical when someone’s action harms another. Isn’t the intentional creation of a human being who has
been deprived of vital information about themselves and a meaningful relationship with their biological family harmful? In my view the only
ethical standard that needs be applied when considered whether or not to allow surrogacy and donor conception.
As disgusted as one might be by the American event, it is time to reflect, and to acknowledge that for decades we Belgians have been
violating human rights on our own soil when we enabled the commercialization of “Plan B parenthood” at the expense of children who are
conceived to fulfil the dreams of an adult.
Stephanie Raeymaekers is the chair of Donorkinderen, a Belgian organisation that promotes cross-border registration of donors and the right of donor-conceived persons to know their parentage. The above article is reproduced from the Donorkinderen blog with her permission.
Contact her on stephke.r@pandora.be
Copyright © Stephanie Raeymaekers . Published by MercatorNet. You may download and print extracts from this article for your own personal and
non-commercial use only. Contact us at mcook@mercatornet.com if you wish to discuss republication.


Johns Hopkins (University, USA) psychiatrist drops TRUTH BOMB about transgenders – liberals furious


By Michele Hickford, Editor-in-Chief, 5:50pm May 10, 2016

It is simply amazing how such a tiny minority in our country….just three tenths of a percent… has forced a
national debate about whether the public bathroom they visit should or should not match the gender of their
The entire notion of gender is being questioned. It is now “bigoted” to believe we live in a
“gender-binary” world. The idea that humans come in only two flavors: male and female, is seen as
outdated, old-fashioned, antiquated and just plain mean.
Now we must accept “gender fluidity.” Children as young as four are being encouraged to choose their
gender identity, as if it were a Halloween costume.
And according to a noted psychiatrist, that’s just about right.
As CNS News reports, Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at
Johns Hopkins University and former psychiatrist–in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital, who has
studied transgendered people for 40 years, said it is a scientific fact that “transgendered men
do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men.
All such people, he explained in an article for The Witherspoon Institute, “become feminized men or
masculinized women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they ‘identify.’”
Dr. McHugh, who was psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital for 26 years, the medical institute that
had initially pioneered sex-change surgery – and later ceased the practice – stressed that the
cultural meme, or idea that “one’s sex is fluid and a matter of choice” is extremely damaging, especially to
young people.
Now this will REALLY whip liberals into a frenzy, but Dr. McHugh says those who wish to change their
gender suffer from a psychiatric condition, not an accident of birth.
Gender dysphoria — the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex — belongs in
the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and
body dysmorphic disorder,” said McHugh.
“Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats
obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction,” he said.
Perhaps the most tragic part of this new trend is the consequence. After the immense pain and hardship of
transitioning, a high percentage of transgendered individuals eventually take their own lives.
When “the tumult and shouting dies,” McHugh continued, “it proves not easy nor wise to live in a
counterfeit sexual garb. The most thorough follow-up of sex-reassigned people — extending over 30 years and
conducted in Sweden, where the culture is strongly supportive of the transgendered — documents their
lifelong mental unrest.”
“Ten to 15 years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone
sex-reassignment surgery rose to 20 times that of comparable peers,” said McHugh.
I will probably get hammered by our liberal readers for apparently “trivializing” this issue, but here
I go anyway…
When I was growing up in the ‘70’s there was a TV commercial for Chiffon margarine, which apparently
tasted just like butter… but it’s not. The very last (and very famous) line from the commercial was
“It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.”
Apparently that is still the case.

Four reasons it’s vital to keep marriage between one man and one woman only

Australian Family Association

Laws don’t operate in isolation. They work in combination with other laws.
Same-sex marriage law will operate in combination with Federal, state and territory anti-discrimination
laws that now list as protected attributes:
sexual orientation (straight, homosexual, lesbian, bisexual and transgender); and
gender identity (self-identified, gender-related identity, appearance or mannerisms without regard to
a person’s sex at birth). Over 60 so-called new genders have been “identified”; they are pure
inventions, but are protected in anti-discrimination laws.
The effect of same-sex marriage in combination with Federal, state and territory anti-discrimination laws will be:
Compulsory gay sex education: Same-sex marriage will make it legal to teach homosexual and lesbian
marriage and sexual practices in sex education classes in schools. This is already happening to a
limited extent in schools.
Then, if a teacher or schools objects, they will be accused violating protections for sexual
orientation/gender identity in anti-discrimination laws. At that point, teaching gay marriage will
effectively be made compulsory in schools.
It is the right of parents to determine when and how they teach their children about gay issues, not the
courts and not the school.
Changing birth certificates: There will be a concerted effort to replace “mother” and “father” with “parent 1” and
“parent 2” on birth certificates. “Mother” and “father” will become terms that discriminate against
homosexual and lesbian parents. The ACT legislature has already replaced “mother” and “father” with “parent 1”
and “parent 2” on birth certificates.
This denies the basic right of children to know from their birth certificate their biological mother and father.
No safe place for girls and women. Males identifying as females will be able to use female bathrooms,
change rooms and female only gyms. Already, young boys identifying as girls are demanding the use of girls’
toilets in schools.
Girls and women have the right to have their own toilets and change rooms and safe places.
Losing our democratic freedom of speech. Will it be considered discrimination to speak in favour of
man+woman marriage and natural family? Will it be discrimination to state the fact that research shows that
overwhelmingly boys wanting to transgender to be girls, or girls wanting to be boys, eventually grow out of
this and identify only with their biological sex by the time they are adults.
Australians cannot have a free democracy without freedom of speech.
It is important to keep marriage between a man and a woman:
to protect the rights of parents to determine the education of their children;
to protect the rights of children to have their birth certificate clearly name their biological mum and dad;
to maintain safe places for women and girls; and
to protect our democratic freedom of speech.

Wrong even if it were made Law

Picture From rt.com



        powered by FreeFind