Woman in New York Times: I chose my sperm donor from list of ‘flawless’ men
The “choice” culture is so self-centered. We presume the right and ability to control everything. As a consequence, unconditional love is eroding as we think of ourselves as so special.
These trends are particularly evident in the baby-making industry. The New York Times has a celebratory column by a woman who waxes ecstatically about choosing the characteristics of her baby–apparently including his sex–as if she were buying a camp shirt at Tommy Bahama. From the column, by Dawn Bovasso:
I chose my son by clicking and unclicking a series of boxes, not unlike online dating. Some days, I’d scroll through all of the redheads. Other days, all of the Jude Law look-alikes. Most of the donors seemed to be some combination of rock star and rocket scientist; they were “handsome” and “witty” and “engaging.”
There was no easy way for me to choose from so many flawless (but relatively indistinguishable) men, particularly when this choice would have such a profound impact on both my life and my child’s. So I kept browsing around, spending Friday nights curled up with the top 1 percent of the male population…
Without any more hesitation, I chose “Open” and “Above 5 feet 10 inches,” which left four options. One of them looked like Tom Brady and had a Ph.D. I added him to my cart.
From the newspaper that screams–and caters to the liberal elites–those who wring their hands about inequality!
And it turns out, the special order baby has many half-siblings similarly special ordered by other baby orderers:
By being so willing to talk about Leo’s origins, my choice wasn’t just about genetics and the far future. It became about a community of people making the same choice and open to the same kind of sprawling family – right now.
This community of half siblings and their moms isn’t anything I’d read about in any of the books or blogs, and it has been, quite honestly, the most moving and profound part of using a donor. With these choices, I have given myself something quite extraordinary, too.
This is what used to be called “positive eugenics.”
We have become so filled with catering to our own desires that we presume the right to both have a baby and the baby we want.
Worse, if the special order baby looks in utero not to fit the bill, we simply refuse delivery at a friendly Planned Parenthood return center, or if biologically colonizing in India, just leave the baby there.
Meanwhile, parentless children cry themselves to sleep at night praying for a home.
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!
Reprinted with permission from National Review.