Cardinal rips on Ricky Martin fathering twins by surrogate – with his cousin?


Ricky Martin announced last week that he was the father to several weeks old twin baby boys born through a surrogate, but didn’t provide much more information about it. The 36 year-old singer said he was “elated to begin this new chapter in his life” and from the way his statement was worded it sounded like he would be raising the twins alone, but that wasn’t directly said. It’s possible he has either a female or male partner but doesn’t feel like disclosing that information to the public.

A high-ranking member of the religious community has spoken out about Ricky’s decision to become a maybe-single parent through surrogacy. The cardinal of Honduras says Ricky is somehow buying children like products, which is disrespectful of human life. A Mexican talk show host also calls Ricky selfish for his actions:

The Puerto Rican singer recently fathered twin boys, born to a surrogate mother, who is rumoured to be a cousin of the singer.

And, following on from congratulations from his pop peers, those who aren’t happy about Martin’s new paternal role are speaking out now.

The cardinal of Honduras, Oscar Andres Rodriguez, accuses the singer of going against human dignity.

On a visit to Chile, the Catholic leader said, “What Martin did diminishes the dignity of a human being. You can’t just buy or rent life. It’s even worse when someone famous and in the public eye is doing it.”

And he isn’t alone – Mexican talk show host Esteban Arce has also spoken out against Martin.

On his show Matutino Express, Arce said, “I don’t think it’s right to deny children of maternal figures, just because you have a big ego.”

[From Contact Music]

If the mother really is Ricky’s cousin, the boys may at least have contact with her and know their history when they get older. If it’s his first cousin, though, that brings up all sorts of genetic questions if his sperm was used to inseminate her. (Update: it’s also possible that another woman’s eggs were used and that his cousin was just the surrogate, which would mean there are no genetic issues of course. Thanks Bleeker!)

How is it ego-driven to have children? That’s one of the most selfless things you can do. This guy should be applauded.

On Monday we reported a story that an unnamed magazine editor called Ricky’s new role as a father “icky” because his reasons for doing it were not known. The editor said that magazines are not too eager to publish the photos of the twins because they don’t think Ricky is willing to talk much about it. No one calls it icky when single moms like Sheryl Crow, Meg Ryan and Mary-Louise Parker chose to adopt.

Ricky is shown getting his star on the Walk of fame on 10/16/07. Credit: Nikki Nelson / WENN

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

56 Responses to “Cardinal rips on Ricky Martin fathering twins by surrogate – with his cousin?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. bros says:

    whatever. i see no problem with this as long as it wasnt his first cousin. what business is it of the cardinal’s? does this mean the catholic church is now against all forms of surrogacy? or just when those whose heterosexuality is suspect? i thought the catholics were all for more children, no matter how they get into this world. as for going against human dignity by fathering kids without being married to a woman, i dont think the child-molesting catholic church has any more moral highground to talk about what is harming children, since they are one of the largest institutional culprits.

  2. Beeker says:

    Sheesh, people just don’t understand the details of reproductive science…
    Surrogacy involves using a donor/host womb, but NOT usually the same donor’s egg. I have often had conversations with my sister about the potential of being a surrogate for her if it were necessary, or vice versa. That would mean that HER egg and HER husband’s sperm were used… nothing of mine but the uterus.
    Also, thanks for calling out the double standard for male vs. female celebrities. We want fathers to be involved in their children’s lives, we expect them to love their kids, but somehow it’s wrong for a man to WANT to be a father??? Gah.

  3. Enonymous says:

    I can understand were those criticisms are coming from and there is quite a difference between adopting and actually using a surrogate to be a single parent. I have no problem with it as long a the children will have a good life (and he seems happy to finaly be a father). Also, there is nothing wrong that IF Ricky Martin was gay and came out publicly about it, then he will have a lot more support (also it would make more sense).

  4. Celebitchy says:

    That’s a good point Beeker about another woman’s egg, and I will mention that. Thanks!

  5. Lola says:

    I don’t get the fuss. Does this cardinal know that there is a war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Does he know that there are so many people living in abject poverty in the world while the rich get richer? Get a life good cardinal. Find better things to preach about. Better still, tackle the sex abuse scourge in the catholic church. Now that will be time well spent. Leave Ricky alone, he wants kids,let him have them.

  6. elisha says:

    I think that IS a little sketchy if it was indeed his cousin’s egg. If not, than of course you’d want a family member to carry your baby as opposed to a stranger.

    As for the Cardinal, inbreeding in many places is against the law for health reasons, not for religious reasons. Why do religious people feel the need to chime in on things that have nothing to do with them?

    Just to reiterate what I said on the other post, I didn’t really interpret the magazine editor’s quote as her saying she thought his “role as a father is ‘icky'”. For some reason I got the impression she meant the way he “announced” in true celebrity fashion that he’s a father, but then didn’t want to give any other tidbits about how that came to be. I mean, hello, he totally got people intrigued and curious by making the announcement and then didn’t want to give anything else. Why not just be a dad without taking the celeb route of making an announcement?

  7. Wif says:

    The phrase “dignity of human life” is very fuzzy. A pregnancy that results from a rape is natural, but not dignified. It’s not as if the child had genetic traits picked out. If a person wants a child and that child is in a loving home (and all accounts I’ve read are that RM is a charitable and kind man) then it is a very dignified condition.

  8. geronimo says:

    Very well said to all here. Apart from a hollow laugh at the Catholic Church’s lofty proclamations about what is and isn’t respectful or dignified, nothing further to add.

  9. Syko says:

    I don’t see where the Cardinal has any business being involved in this at all. And I don’t think Ricky Martin having kids with a surrogate is “icky”. Sure, he probably prefers sleeping with men, although we don’t know that for a fact. But gay men can be parents just as well as straight men can.

  10. czarina says:

    OK, well, basically think about what marriage and children mean to the Catholic Church.
    Never, ever, has the Church supported having children outside of marriage, or using a surrogate to have children. Crazy as it sounds, the Catholic Church actually thinks that some things were destined by God.
    Whether or not you agree, the Church has every right to defend a position they have held for thousands of years and also as much right to speak out in public about it as a tabloid or a talk show.
    Also, please remember that Ricky Martin is more famous in Latin America than North America, where there is a much larger population of Catholics–hence, why his surogate/adoption would get more notice than, say, Shryl Crow’s. No doubt, if asked, the Catholic Church would be equally as disapproving of a sigle woman adopting a baby outside of wedlock.
    As a Catholic, I often respectfully disagree with various moral/ethical issues of our day. On the other hand, the Catholic Chruch has been doing a lot of good for people all over the world–there have been Catholic missionaries taking care of orphans in Africa long before it became a popular cause, and for all their disapproval of homosexuality, there have been thousands of AIDS clinics around the world funded and run by Catholics.
    Too many people are so intolerant of religion they don’t appreciate that while the Church has its own morals and traditions, it has a greater love for humanity in general.
    People seem to expect the Church to just abandon their moral/traditional positions in the face of modern society and all-out Political Correctness, but why should they?
    Bros–the fact that there were priests who molested children is something the Church SHOULD be ashamed of–but please remember that that WAS only a small group of people out of a billion individuals who belong to the Church. The same as cases of teachers molesting or abusing students is hardly an indictment of the entire teaching profession.

  11. Jo says:

    1) bros, it’s extremely unkind and hypocritical to refer to the entire Catholic Church as ‘child-molesting.’ It is an unfair generalization as is the assumption that if one cardinal says it, the entire group must believe it as a whole. A great majority of us were hugely appalled at that whole incident and abuse of trust, particularly the ones whose children were vicitimized.

    2) I just can’t agree with those cardinal’s words. What happens when those twins grow up and find all this press when they’re older? It’s irresponsible of him.

    3) Ricky has every right to choose how he wants to bring children into this world and show them love, and responsible, loving single fathers is something that should be seen more, for SURE. At the same time, I can’t help but wonder why he couldn’t adopt and take in children already here in the world, suffering and in dire need of the love and privilege he so obviously possesses.

  12. Larissa says:

    what this people have anything to with Ricky Martin in first place?lol
    I don´t care and I´m sure he doesn´t care either…

    go daddy!

  13. Holly says:

    Actually it HAS been shown that the surrogate’s genetics, despite not producing the egg nor the sperm to fertilize, DO have an influence on the fetus.

  14. daisy424 says:

    A am a recovering Catholic and glad to get out. The priests in my parish shoved their holier than thou pap down our throats at a very young age. Fear of God indeed.

    The abuse is more widespread than reported, and if you were one of the victims, you might not have the same rosy feelings.

  15. bros says:

    jo, clearly it was a generalization. And I do criticize the entire institution, because although it is a small number of priests that do the molesting, the institutional framework of transferring the priests, covering it up, paying people to keep quiet, losing documents, etc, involves the WHOLE institution, which is why the pope himself has had to talk about it: because it refects on the insitution itself. so tell my why this is hypocritical? I dont belong to an institution involved in child molestation scandals, so you might need to look up the definition of hypocritical.

  16. daisy424 says:

    Amen Bros

  17. Whu? says:

    To say that people never have children because of ego is naive and false. It happens a lot. Its only after the child is born that the reality of the absolute self sacrifice it requires to raise a child comes to light. Many people should not have children but still do. Sad reality

  18. czarina says:

    Bros–So should we close schools across North America?
    I don’t say this as a defense or acceptance of ANY child being hurt by ANYONE no matter who they are, or to defend any priest who hurt and betrayed the trust of a child and, in effect, everyone who believed in them. I also abhore anyone who would cover up such a thing, and be more concerned about “keeping face” than helping a victim.
    That being said, when I was in high school one of the male teachers was well known by students to inappropriately touch female students (he was, believe it or not, coach of the swim team!) He even had the nickname “Irv the Perv”. Everyone knew. The teachers HAD to have known. And yet, it was only years later that I read in the paper that a student had brought him up on charges of statuatory rape.
    The students said nothing because they (we) were young and a teacher was in a position of authority. And we just accepted that was what he was like.
    The teachers/principal said nothing because they wanted to protect the school from bad publicity.
    Cover ups happen in ANY institution.
    Ugly things can happen to children where they SHOULD be safe.
    It’s terrible…but I don’t refuse to send my kids to school because of what happened in my own past high school.
    The good part–for schools AND Churches, is that people are more educated and aware now.
    Today, at our Church, the Priests work hand in hand with civilian volunteers and the police to make sure that children are never in an unsafe environmnet.
    There are good priests just as there are good teachers.
    Institutions should take responsibility and work to change things and if you investigated, I believe that is exactly what is happening in the church right now.

  19. K says:

    I read once that first cousins have a small enough amount of DNA in common that chances of their children having genetic mutations, etc. are very small. It still seems strange that he would use his cousin’s egg, though. I hope it was the case of another woman’s egg, her uterus if it was his first cousin.

  20. SolitaryAngel says:

    @ bros: AMEN again!!!

  21. bros says:

    czarina, I wasnt advocating for the shutdown of the catholic church, although that wouldnt ruin my day if it did. I was pointing out the hilarity/hypocricy of representatives of an institution whose reputation has been incredibly sullied over the past few years for their scandals and insitutionalized cover ups of abuse, passing judgement on others about what is ‘diminishing the dignity of human beings’ when their record on this topic, in terms of the emotional damage caused to hundreds of children over the years, is pretty deplorable. it was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing. not call to shut down any institution that has a child molestation case. last i heard. public and private schools dont routinely talk to the press about their opinions on random people, famous or not, becoming parents through surrogacy. they arent in the habit of making comments about how people chose to conceive. the church does because they think its their business. large difference.

  22. Single is not necessarily a permanent state. Many single women and men have children, then meet someone and marry later on.

    Besides, many kids these days can wind up with a single parent no matter what. Divorce rate is around 50% in the U.S.

  23. kate says:

    i think the catholic church has far bigger things to worry about than ricky martin’s sperm.

  24. Cowbell says:

    It wouldn’t bother me in the least if it were with his 2nd cousin. 1.) because it’s none of my business and 2.) why would it matter if it’s his cousin? It’s not incest, just using her womb.

    I think it’s funny how the church is all over this like Ricky is a bad person yet they’d probably applaud that Duggar Family who’s churning kids like a puppy mill.

  25. czarina says:

    Bros; Since when is a moral or ethical issue NOT something a religious institution should comment upon?
    Do you think a tabloid or a talk show has more “right” to discuss the issue than a church?
    The Church has a lot of things in its past that are both embarassing and blameworthy, because, let’s face it, ANY institution run by human beings is going to be flawed and, in cases, corrupt.
    That does not diminish the core moral and ethical values that the Church stands for–no few people can take that away–or all the good it does in the world (which you didn’t bother to address).
    As I said, I respectfully disagree with some of the Church’s views on some issues, surrogacy being one of them.
    Nevertheless, I respect that the Church stands by its principles and doesn’t cower in the face of secular pressure.

  26. Hambone says:

    The church sucks. The cardinal just wants the kids for himself to molest.

  27. Nouvel says:

    More power to him if he wants children. Most adults do. Give me a break, who are they to tell someone else what they can do with their life??????? I mean really… I think it is beautiful. I have heard he has a male partner, and if so, those children will be loved doubley.. CONGRATULATIONS RICKY !! Don’t let haters get to you.. jealousy is a bad thing and misery loves company for sure.. !! CHILDREN ARE A HUGE BLESSING. You think the church woudl know that.. shame on them

  28. Maritza says:

    There are millions of single mothers raising their kids alone, so why on earth is it a problem if Ricky decides to pay to have his own biological kids fertilized in a surrogate mother? At least this way he knows for sure no court is going to make him pay child support to live with someone else other than him.

  29. Rosanna says:

    It’s selfish when one goes the surrogate route just to have a “mini-me”.

  30. Orangejulius says:

    I don’t have any figures to back this up, but I believe the molestation of kids by priests was/is FAR more common than that of teachers doing the molesting. I’m probably trampling on a lot of toes here, but I have absolutely no respect for any organized religion. They all suck. They need to shut up and mind their own business.

  31. czarina says:

    Orangejulius: I have all the respect in the world for your opinion about organized religion. My husband is actually an Athiest (although I have to admit, his objections to organized religion are a little more rational than ‘they suck’).
    However, if YOU are entitled to your opinion and to have it respected, why would you not extend the same courtesy to religious organizations? Why are they expected to “shut up and mind their own business” when you, yourself, feel free to express your opinion?

  32. Leandra says:

    Like they have room to talk. So molesting alter boys isn’t going against human dignity? What hypocrites. They need to mind their own business and clean up the huge mess in their own back yard. Those boys will lack for nothing.

  33. Sorry, Rosanna, but having a child using a surrogate is no more “selfish” than having a child the old fashioned way.

  34. Dubdub2000 says:

    Since when is having children self-less?

    There are very very few people who have kids for self-less reasons i.e. for the kids. Most people have kids “for themselves”, not to improve someone’s else’s life but to fulfill either a- what is expected of them as a couple b-what is expected of them as a woman c-because they want to be uncondionally loved d- because they think it will fix their couple issues e-because they are lonely etc… etc…
    All these rich gay folks who are hellbent on having biological kids creep me out. You are gay, therefore you will not breed as you can’t: you are gay. Simple, no? Want kids? Loads of kids need to be adopted or fostered so stop playing dr frankestein with you sister’s cousin’s womb adding your neighbor’s egg and your partner’s sperm, this is not somekind of experiment! You are playing with a human’s life. Be responsible and embellish the life of a child already on this planet. It’s not as if mankind were an endangered species!
    This is ridiculous! 30 more years and western society will function like in that movie “Gattaca”…(shaking my head)

  35. Orangejulius says:

    Czarina: I am merely an individual on a blogging website. My opinion is only given here, not broadcast to entire nations, thereby influencing people, especially vulnerable, ignorant people. I don’t have a history of bloodshed, torture, intolerance, dogma spouting and homophobia. I include all religions in this.

    I also respect your opinions on here and think you usually show good judgement. I think this is the first time I’ve disagreed with you. Friends, please?

  36. bros says:

    good lord czarina, i feel like my logic is just running up against a brick wall again with you. first I had to use the pot calling the kettle black. i am not criticizing the church for proclaiming its views on morality. afterall, it is in the business of morality. I am making the comments I am because the church is talking about human dignity and children and it has a great big shmear across its face when it comes to this topic as it ruined and emotionally murdered hundereds of children. so maybe this one will do it for you: people who live in glass houses should not throw stones when the very kind of stones they are throwing are the ones that will really break the house’s glass.

  37. czarina says:

    Orangejulius: Absolutely friends! As I said, my husband is an Athiest and also a follower of Aristotilian logic–believe me, NOBODY argues against organized religion like he does!! If I can be happily married to HIM, I certainly have no antagonism towards other posters.
    I totally believe in agruing perspectives, not personalities.

    Bros; What, exactly, do you know about the Church’s teachings? Have you read the Catechism? Have you read any of its philosophers?
    Yes, there are incidents in the Church’s past that deserve great blame (many of which have been acknowledged and publicly apologized for). As for the molestation of children…there is no excuse-not for those who did it or those who covered it up. All the Church, like any institution, can do is acknowledge its responsibility and try to ensure things are different. Which it is trying to do.
    However, that does not negate all the good the Church does for children, for the poor, for people everywhere in the world. It doesn’t make 2000 years of history, not just the bad, but also the good disappear. It doesn’t take away what Church teachings are based on–human dignity–even if those teachings are corrupted and ignored by some.
    Too many people think of the Church as old men in the Vatican. To me, it’s my local Church filled with wonderful people who are kind, considerate and who work very hard to live their beliefs.
    Your “glass house” argument, doesn’t take into account that the Church is not a monolith…it does not belong to the Pope or the Cardinals or the Priests. It belongs to the millions and millions of everyday, average, decent human beings who believe in its teachings even if they don’t always live up to them.

  38. ssss says:

    There is no problem with having a child with a first cousin.
    There is no significant difference (indistinguishable from zero) between the genetic material created by cousins having a baby and two strangers having a baby.

  39. czarina says:

    SSSS; according to a University of Washington study (2002), on average an unrelated couple has a 3%-4% chance of having a child with a birth defect, while first or second cousins carry an additional risk of 1.7% to 2.8%.
    So, you’re absolutely right, the additional risk of birth defects is quite minimal (although I wouldn’t say indistinguishable from zero).
    I believe that prohibation on marrying closely within the family came from Royal families who inbred continuously until there were an number of birth defects and other genetic problems.
    Likely marrying a first cousin once and having their kids marry outside the family would not lead to problems.(genetically speaking)

  40. gg says:

    “How is it ego-driven to have children?”

    😆 😆 It can be VERY ego-driven, like somebody above said, and then the reality of babies and dirty diapers and no sleep for years hits them full in the face, and the shock sets in. I’ve known several people who have done that, and celebs all over the place who pretty much look like they’re doing just that. Some, not all, before I get blasted.

    Not to mention the roughly twenty teenagers I saw on Brighton Pier at 10:30 at night, with their prams, babies inside, trying to pick up men dressed in their slutty outfits and stilletto heels, smoking cigs. Truly sad.

    I don’t know why Ricky had to create more mini-me’s if he’s so charitable. He should have adopted imo.

    As to the genetic defects between cousins: My sister married a man from Ireland. His grandfather married his first cousin. They all had big families. 3/4 of the family (about 30 people) have got twisted and bent fingers (about 90 degrees in some cases) and toes deformed. Don’t tell me there are no lasting effects. The first things to go are the digits. Nobody knows about the underlying defects.

  41. vdantev says:

    Oh, like that little fruity pants would have any contact with an actual vagina, proxy or otherwise. He makes Richard Simmons seem like Bruce Willis in a Die Hard movie.

  42. ghg says:

    My grandparents were first cousins. There are no birth defects among any of their 8 children, 28 grandchildren or dozens of great-granchildren. Not saying it can’t happen; but it’s not common. Also, I was an altarboy for 8 years. I was never, ever approached in an inappropriate way by a priest, and neither were any of the altarboys I knew (we’ve asked each other since the scandal broke.) In fact, the best people I’ve ever met have been priests and nuns. There were some criminals in the church, and some administrators who didn’t have the courage to deal with them, or perhaps were just plain cowards. That is unforgiveable, but it doesn’t change the core message of the church, any more than Nixon changed the core ideals of America.
    As for Ricky Martin, what the Cardinal was trying to say was that in the church’s view, human beings have inherent dignity and rights, and one of those rights is a “natural” conception and birth. The church is against in-vitro fertilization, too, for the same reason, but it is not against treatment for infertility. This becomes a very much more complex theological and philosophical issue, if you are interested.

  43. Jill says:

    um, thank you dubdub! i really don’t think having children is a selfless thing to do. i am not bashing people for having kids, by any means, but you are spot on about man not being an endangered species. having children is inherently selfish–you want someone to carry on your genes, and “go forth and multiply” is not a good motto in this day and age. a truly selfless person would adopt a child already born who needed a home. again, not bashing anyone, i’ll probably even have a child of my own someday– but you won’t find me talking about how selfless i am to do it.

  44. GG, get off the moral high horse.

    People don’t have to adopt children if they don’t want to. Its NOT for everyone. And it should not be done for “charitable” reasons, either. This is the wrong reason to adopt a child. If you think of a kid as just a charity case, don’t adopt him, you aren’t doing him any favors.

    And its strange how you rip parenthood and having kids, but at the same time recommend adopting. What’s the difference? Either way, you wind up with the stress that you talk about – the dirty diapers, the late nights, etc.

    I find it so hypocritical how the anti-child brigade always slams parenthood, but supports adoption.

  45. Jill says:

    oh, and i didn’t know ricky martin was parading his devout catholicism around? if he ‘s not holding himself up as some paragon of catholicism, the church should just stfu. it’s not their business what he does. don’t they have better things to do?

  46. Jill says:

    Cindy, please, no one is “anti-child” here. Someone “anti-child” would want the orphaned kids to rot away in their orphanages. Stop looking *down* on gg on his high horse.

  47. gg says:

    Cindy, you misread my entire post! I never ripped parenthood in any way. I ripped people not thinking before they have kids, because guess what – a lot of those very kids wind up in adoption centers. I have my own opinion and you are obviously having a bad week and need to rip on others.
    Have a nice weekend.
    🙄

    And Love to Jill. 🙂 I am a female by the way, and I love kids.

  48. vdantev says:

    I find it so hypocritical how the anti-child brigade always slams parenthood, but supports adoption.

    What are you smoking ? Did you forget how to read or did you just make up your own responses in your mind to get mad at?

  49. Gabell73 says:

    It seems to me that these people who are giving Ricky a hard time have nothing better to do.
    When I married my husband he was 30 and he made it very clear that he wanted to start working on me getting pregnant because he wanted to be a Dad. My husband is of Hispanic origin. In their culture it is a great honor to be a father. There main goal is family and they work hard to provide for their family. So it doesn’t sound icky to me for Ricky to want children. And I agree with Bleeker, most of most of the time, especial is the one wanting the child is a man they do not use the eggs from the donor carrier. But they do use the sperm from the Dad who wants the child.
    On top of that, using a relative to carry the child make all the sense in the world to me. A relative is someone that you know and you can trust. If someone else is carrying your baby would you want to know that the person was going to take care of themselves? Not going to smoke, or drink alcohol, or do drugs, or anything else that could harm the baby. Sounds like to me he is taking this very seriously. And that he is taking every precaution necessary to insure a healthy baby. So why would he screw all that up by using the eggs from his cousin – when it is well known that that could cause birth defects. Come on people use your brains. He might have been the singer that came up with She Bangs but he doesn’t strike me as stupid.

    Gabell73 :mrgreen:

  50. CoonAss says:

    The icky comment was rude. End of story. However, comparing what Ricky Martin did to single WOmen who have ADOPTED is manipulative, dishonest or ignorant. Ricky Martin didn’t adopt an unwanted child. Those single WOmen named in the article did. Comparing the two? Apples. Oranges.

    Having a child is NOT the most selfless thing a person can do. Adopting a child is. Having a child is one of the most selfISH things a person can do. Hell, many people can’t even financially afford to take care of them.

    I have spent decades asking people to name one reason to have a child that ISN’T selfish. An extremely cynical and single person asked me the question once and I thought it was interesting, but then again, I majored in Psychology and Sociology.

    I have honest friends and every one of them admits that they can’t think of one. Not even ONE. That doesn’t mean they aren’t great parents. The vast majority of them are, but they are also honest and realistic. Even people I know who couldn’t think of any before they had children haven’t been able to think of one since they had children. One is my brother. Yes, we all laugh about it. A LOT.

    Why do people have children? Some WOmen get pregnant to get a man to marry her. Some do in order to keep a man. To save a marriage. Because they love their spouse and want a baby to reflect that or, as they word it, to “share” their love. To take care of them when they’re old. Because they want to be loved. Because they want to be loved unconditionally. Because they want to feel the kind of love a parent has for a child.

    Think about it. All of the above reasons have to do with the person who wants to have a child, not the child. If people stop and rationally THINK about it instead of focusing on how they FEEL about babies and children, or how they FEEL about love and relationships and the world, it’s pretty accurate.

    I’ve never posted a comment to this site before, so I can’t WAIT to read any comments to this post. If there are any, I’m sure that most of them will be from parents or people who want children trying to list an UNselfish reason to have children. I hope I remember to come back.

    Cele|bitchy » Blog Archive » Cardinal rips on Ricky Martin fathering twins by surrogate – with his cousin?

  51. daisy424 says:

    “Religion is sort of like a lift in your shoes. If it makes you feel better, fine. Just don’t ask me to wear your shoes.” [George Carlin]

    IMO he has the best slant on the Catholic religion.:wink:

  52. RAN says:

    I very selfishly had two beautiful girls and one stepdaughter. I would welcome more of my own and would consider adopting children — although the adoption thing is extremely selfish of me because I very selfishly want to help and love someone who needs help, love, and a good home.

    I just realized how selfish I am. 😳

  53. Listen, Coonass, People do NOT have to adopt if they don’t want to. I’ve researched adoption and even signed on with an adoption agency at one point. I came to the conclusion that the whole adoption industry sucks. Its a well organized, money-sucking scam. It exploits children as well as people who want kids.

    You can scream all day long about how “selfish” people are for giving birth to biological children, doing IVF, whatever. The fact is, YOU DO NOT GET TO DECIDE HOW THEY CREATE THEIR FAMILIES.

  54. I had a biological baby and could care less how “selfish” someone else thinks I am. It is incredibly arrogant to believe that anyone owes you an excuse or apology for having biological children.

    I feel no guilt at all for not adopting!!! I sleep just fine at night.

  55. gg says:

    Oh, don’t get all foamed up again. The Point is: Think before you have kids. Don’t have kids/adopt for any reasons other than noble ones.

    People frequently do not think before they get kids. But some do. Everybody is different.

    And vdantef, wtf are you even talking about???

  56. Benjamin Franklin says:

    Maybe Ricky is gay, and wanted to give his mother and father grandchildren. If that were the case, this would make sense, and not be a sign that he was in some way a big egotist-though why his wanting children related to him would be more egotistical than that of normal married couples escapes me. Who has never heard of elderly parents asking their adult offspring when they are going to have kids, in a very hopeful way?