Did you do any more thinking about the wisdom of insisting on same-sex conception rights? Above you seemed to equate them under the rubric of “lab rights”, implying that if a man has a right to use IVF with a woman, then he should have the same right to use whatever lab techniques it takes to have a child with another man, too. But that ignores the biological sexual imprinting of every person’s genes. There is a fundamental right that we all should have with someone of the other sex that we shouldn’t have with someone of the same sex: the right to conceive children together.

Give up! Support the Egg and Sperm Civil Union Compromise to achieve equal protections for same-sex couples immediately, and preserve natural conception rights. don’t push us into a eugenic nightmare where couples do not have a right to conceive with their own genes, don’t imply that a hetero couple’s conception rights are equal to a same-sex couple’s.

I know how much this donating of egg and sperm means so I write this with much regret.

But it needs to be mentioned also that the donor-conceived are unhappy and so the have their own support group called Tangled Webs and an on-line debating forum called DonorMisconception.

I am a counselllor who has seen the uncontrollable tears of those away from their roots: as little ones, most any child is compliant but the donateds have their problems which develop as they grow up and think for themselves. Truly, if you could see what they go through I can’t help thinking that nobody would reading this would be happy at being away from their roots by means of being donated.

Twenty years after IVF went mainstream the donor-conceived are speaking out as the young adults that they now are, cystic fibrosis and blood disorder risks notwithstanding.

First the complaint: what’s with raising all the straw men at the end? Those are totally seperate things you are objecting to. And while I suppose it’s true that CU’s could be changed after the compromise is adopted, so could marriage, so could NH CU’s, etc. Nothing is certain to last forever. But actually the compromise would protect against diluting CU’s after the fact, because Congress would stipulate that it would give federal recognition to state CU’s that were defined as being exactly like marriage except the couple was not allowed to conceive children together using their own genes. That would force states to adopt the strongest, most equal CU’s possible (without conception rights) and leave them that way. They couldn’t strip out anything else from them without giving up the federal recognition, and that would just be political suicide for whoever tried to do that. And Congress isn’t going to change CU’s after they enact the compromise, because it would be too ungentlemanly to alter the deal. The deal is just so neat and orderly and makes so much sense, it will be permanent.

And this is way wrong: “The author is advocating that congress legislate who can and cannot reproduce.”

No no no no, I’m saying that people should only be allowed to use their unmodified gametes. Everyone should be allowed to use their unmodified gametes. But that means no one should be allowed to reproduce WITH someone of their same sex. It does not mean that anyone is kept from reproducing. That is indeed my main concern - that people will be kept from reproducing, that doctors will suggest or even force people to use better gametes, whether GE’d or just from healthier people. the only way to avoid that is to prohibit the use of GE’d gametes (and yeah, I believe we should prohibit donor gametes too, but that is a separate crusade, unrelated to the egg and sperm compromise, and far less important. plus, that wouldn’t pass anyhow.)

Yes, same-sex conception would take place in the lab, not the bedroom. But out on the streets, in public, in the public records of city hall, we can know that this couple is allowed to conceive together, and this couple isn’t, because we know their sexes. (Just like we know their relatedness and age and marital status in the public records).

Stopping same-sex marriage won’t stop same-sex conception. (I believe that as long as same-sex conception is allowed, same-sex marriage should be allowed, in contrast to many frauds that say they oppose SSM but secretly believe same-sex conception should be legal). But if we stop same-sex conception (along with all use of modified gametes) we have to stop same-sex marriage in order to preserve marriage.

It comes down to: you should have a right to conceive with a woman, but not with a man. And all marriages shoudl be allowed to conceive. This distinction shoudl be the distinction between CU’s and marriage, and this distinction would enable us to break the impasse and actually achieve national CU’s for same sex couples. It would be a breakthrough, giving same-sex couples equal protections much much faster and more securely than any other plan I’ve seen. And it would help us prioritize our medical research money better. There is no reason to reject this plan except to insist on being allowed to try same-sex conception, which is totally ridiculous and frivolous and stupid. Please talk it over with your pals and make the concession on marriage.