‘We are expected to be OK with not having children’: how gay parenthood through surrogacy became a battleground

[DreamKing]

ANC supporters do it fine?

anc supporters are freeloaders. so are you talking about those gay guys?

 

[Gyre]

You do know the difference between "cannot" and "should not" ?

The one is based on reality and the other is based on your worthless opinion?

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

The one is based on reality and the other is based on your worthless opinion?

As in you cannot fathom reality and thus should not proffer any opinion?

 

[Gyre]

anc supporters are freeloaders. so are you talking about those gay guys?

People have been having babies for millions of years with no medical aids, that is how you're here.

 

[Gyre]

Always ducking and diving....what a troll.

That answer is "yes"

Edit: Changing what you wrote after people have seen it makes you seem less smart and less confident.

 

[DreamKing]

People have been having babies for millions of years with no medical aids, that is how you're here.

exactly, why you need medical aids now?

you know why? they were all NORMAL people.

 

[Lucas Buck]

A same-sex couple is infertile by definition.

A gay couple having sex and not producing children is natural. It's not a disease by definition.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

25000+ posts... in almost 2 years.

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Have you interviewed all of them to know for a fact they did not procreate? Where is your proof?

Oh, so the proof now is that I didn't speak to all gay people? Silly argument.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

The gays dads in straight marriages disagree?

What I said. Some gays in straight marriages do procreate. However, those are then bisexual, not exclusively gay:

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Ssh. Leave logic at the door.

Exclusively homosexual are in hetrosexual marriages and procreate?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Lots of gay dads in the world, science shows their sperm still works. Maybe if the woman look enough like a man they can get away with it too

Then they're bisexual and not gay which is exclusively homosexual. I post the Kinsey scale for you again. It seems that evidence that only suits your argument is accepted by you:

 

[Kieppie]

What I said. Some gays in straight marriages do procreate. However, those are then bisexual, not exclusively gay:

 

[Cosmik Debris]

No, they do not. Some are openly hostile against gay people.

Some. How many? Percentage?

 

[Lucas Buck]

No amount of reason can ever get an entitled progressive to change their mind. It would never occur to them that creating a loophole to allow gay men to use their IVF for a third party would then allow anyone to use that benefit for any third party. Your friend wants a baby and doesn't have good cover? No problem as long as you are homosexual, your IVF benefit can be given to anyone on the planet.

The system could be open to abuse which is why coverage for surrogates are taken out for them specifically and from what I've read, is mostly separate from normal coverage.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Because that affects you how?

he pays for it via his medical aid costs going up.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Okay got it. We should just accept everything as it is and never complain unless it affects us.

I'm not paying for a surrogate. I'll find another medical aid rather. Go woke, go broke.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

The woke cult teaches us that men can get pregnant. So, whats the problem here?

Correct. But now they want a medical aid to pay for a surrogate. If they can get pregnant, then do so.

 

[Gyre]

exactly, why you need medical aids now?

you know why? they were all NORMAL people.

lol

 

[Gyre]

Then they're bisexual and not gay which is exclusively homosexual. I post the Kinsey scale for you again. It seems that evidence that only suits your argument is accepted by you:

Lots of gay people trying to convince themselves that they can "get better" and get married, be good christians and pray the gay away.

Doesn't help that religion teaches people that thoughts and lusts are sin, sex isn't for fun, it's merely to procreate.

Is there a bisexual gene then, if what you are suggesting has any merit?