In some cases, the Church demands that a surrogate mother should carry the child to term.
Some men feel that the more they have children, the more they are important. Therefore you will find that some of them commit rape with the raped women forced to carry out compulsory surrogacy for these men. These women's uterus is being used so that these men can have babies. And what does the Church say in these cases? The Church tells these women "Do not at all costs stop the surrogacy, bring the child in the world." In this case, isn't the womb of the woman sacred? The Church does not allow these women to use the morning after pill, where the foetus in question is still a cell or very few cells.
Has the Church forgotten when bishops and others used to preach that women have no souls? Now the few little fish-shaped cells have a soul? What proof is there of this? Somebody says something, and the parrots repeat it.
Another thing, the Church seems to have a grudge against gays, because heterosexual men have been using woman as a surrogate since sex was invented. There are men who the only thing that they want is having an heir and therefore they use women as surrogates to have an heir. Everybody knows how women were used and in some cases are still used as objects The Church still does not appoint women as bishops, priests and so on. Women are just used to be of service to priests and so on. Where is the dignity of women? The all-female person is used as a commodity by the Church and some men. Women use all their body to serve church officials, so why make an exception of the womb.
Certain people, who feel obliged to obey the Church, should ask, which doctrine of the Church, should I obey? The part which said that purgatory existed and that autopsies are sinful, and the rest.
Well, you who are reading this, if you need to make a sacrifice to obey the teachings of the current Church, remember that in some 20 years' time, you might find that the Church has changed its opinion on what you had in mind. You would have sacrificed yourself for no purpose.
There were some who worried that with certain interventions, the baby might be born with a handicap. Today, in the vast majority of cases one would know if the foetus is defective at the beginning of pregnancy. We should not forget that the Church could have a vested interest where handicapped children are concerned. When members of the Church look after these children, many are handsomely rewarded. So much so that if we look back in history we find people who used to disfigure normal children, so that they would use them as charitable objects and these people would be able to live a very comfortable life at the expense of these children.
And what should we say of those women, as most likely they would be women, who spend many long years looking after their handicapped children. Many of these women, for many years, would not be able to join their family on an outing.
Everybody preaches sacrifice provided that they do not do it themselves.
And since when has human life been sacred? Have we forgotten the blessing of soldiers taking part in imperialistic wars and the armies of the Church? I would prefer to remove a foetus, if contraceptives fail me, than see my soldier son dead because the country cannot tackle the overpopulation problem.
Some are worried that if surrogacy is introduced there maybe more than two parents. So what! In many cases of consensual divorce and separation, children have parents and step parents, let's say four in number. And many children, with good guidance, manage to establish good relations with all of them. Most of these children are really happy to receive four presents instead of two.
Let's go to back to the rent-a-uterus issue. When I want to carry a very heavy object, I use the services of a strong man and I pay him. Many people use the mind and hands of doctors and nursing staff and pay them, or the government does. If a priest need a kidney, he will not think it twice to accept the kidney of a loyal parishioner, then why should we question the use of the uterus.
Why should not women also use the service of surrogacy? Rich women have used the health and cleaning services of other women for centuries; these services involved the use of the whole body. Also, priests have made use of live-in housekeepers for centuries.
If I had to choose whether to work as a surrogate mother or as a maid I would choose surrogacy. I would love the healthy food and the care and attention I would be given. Surely I would not be obliged to handle heavy objects and so on.
Also, somebody mentioned the Bioethics Committee. Who chooses this committee? Are there any women on it? Of course these women must not be spokespersons of the Church. Let alone that in some organizations we have to do with a token number of women
Citizens need to start thinking with their own minds and not obey the Church blindly.
Josephine Gatt-Ciancio
Kalkara