Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
So if you came out of a person's wang that happened to get $50 you have less rights than someone else. Why does the guy getting paid $50 get more 'protection' from a future kid than some guy who got drunk in the bar and banged some girl. The kid had no say in either situation. One sure isn't more noble than the other. I do believe that these guys should not be screwed because of a technicality going backward, but going forward I don't believe you can enter a person who does not yet exist, into a contract. I don't believe in the rights of the unborn but I do to those of the living.
|
Do you really think these are comparable? One is two adults being consensually irresponsible, the other is two adults making a very informed decision - the male legitimately providing an essential service to humanity, the woman so desperate for a child she's willing to make a huge sacrifice.
And while you may say you can't enter an unborn child into a contract, I'm pretty sure the future child would take being born and not knowing the biological father, over never being born at all because they'd been stripped of their dignified right to know who the real father is.
That's the terms of their creation, and the ends of the bargain must be upheld for the future donor babies.