« Still Happy! | Main | dawg pitchers »
June 02, 2005
little bitty snowflakes in hell
Ok, this article(about these christians adopting other people's un-used frozen embryos through a program called -gack!- Snowflakes) in the NY Times has sent my Appall-O-Meter into the red zone. Oh, my potatoes boileth over!!! And the thing is, its mind-boggling on so many levels. And brings to mind so many problems. Like this one. If an embryo is not adopted by christians, how can it be Saved before it is discarded? So does the Snowflake then go to hell? Oh I am so confused.
But here are a few..uh..choice (for lack of a better word!) representative quotes, for those readers who don't have time to read the actual article.
From some terribly sensitive christian windbag~ why adopt a highway when you can adopt a child? In my head I have often put pets, highways, and embryos in the same general catagory. And for the record, my dog was donated and he has no problem with it. As for highways, I don't know. I don't often contemplate the feelings of highways. Maybe I should.
"We have adopt-a-pet, adopt-a highway," he said. "I personally feel that a child is going to feel a lot more comfortable knowing they were adopted as an embryo than knowing that they were donated."
(of course donation implies one was given away for free. I don't know about other former embryos, but I would definitely feel much better knowing that my parents paid good money for me. Huh??)
This gets more and more surreal the more I contemplate it.
And then there was this~
Those conditions were fine with Bob and Angie Deacon of Virginia Beach, Va., who donated their 13 embryos after having twins and being discouraged from another pregnancy by a doctor. "With another program, to be honest with you, they could have been adopted by lesbian parents, and I'm totally against that," said Mr. Deacon, 35.
Because we want them to be born, but not that much. Right on, Bob.
And finally we have this gem, from the same previous windbag with the highway analogy~
"The best way to increase awareness of embryo adoption is controversy," he said. "The embryonic stem cell research debate has done more to publicize this than anything. Nobody's going to put pictures of the president kissing a child in your paper just to publicize an adoption program."
Lord knows actual children are not on the prezident's agenda, or the newspaper's agenda (unless of course they are murdering their playmates- for gruesome details search yesterday's NY Times for an article much too disturbing to link to) not that anyone is talking about actual children. Right? Oh, these people are so messing with my head. Is it just me or is this conversation totally mind-boggling?
I'm going to go have coffee now.
Talk amongst yourselves.
Whoa. I just had to add something more cheerful!
Check out the right Reverend and the wall of Coke!
Posted by at June 2, 2005 08:50 AM
Comments
One the one hand, I'm glad to see the far right putting their energy into adopting little cell clusters rather than, oh, say, blowing up Planned Parenthood clinics and assassinating doctors.
On the other hand, this strikes me as just another way to advance the argument that as soon as the sperm fertilizes the egg, you're dealing with the equivalent of a five-year old baby.
Posted by: David at June 4, 2005 05:01 PM