Pope Francis called Monday for a universal ban on the “despicable” practice of surrogate motherhood, as he included the “commercialization” of pregnancy in an annual speech listing threats to global peace and human dignity.

In a foreign policy address to ambassadors accredited to the Holy See, Francis lamented that 2024 had dawned at a time in history in which peace is “increasingly threatened, weakened and in some part lost.”

Citing Russia’s war in Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, migration, climate crises and the “immoral” production of nuclear and conventional weapons, Francis delivered a lengthy laundry list of the ills afflicting humanity and the increasing violation of international humanitarian law that allows them.

But Francis also listed smaller-scale issues that he said were threats to peace and human dignity, including surrogacy. Francis said the life of the unborn child must be protected and not “suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking.”

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    We don’t ban things because they’re not affordable enough. We would ban quite a lot of medicine if that were so. This is religious horseshit trying to sweeten itself with a populist angle.

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Im not saying we should ban it, I’m saying we should find a way so not rich people have access too. Perhaps introduce some restrictions to that effect, but ultimately it is individual choice.

      Also, I am from one of the myriad of places outside the United States that has socialized healthcare.

      For the most part we don’t have medicine or treatments that people need to be able to afford. Insurance will cover anything.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Have you ever considered that the high expense of paying someone to be pregnant on your behalf pays a great deal of cash to potentially poor women? Just because rich people are the ones paying for it doesn’t mean they are the only ones that benefit from it. I’d like to imagine a public healthcare system that will pay for the procedure if you can convince a friend or relative to carry the baby for you. That’s conceivable to me. But being pregnant is 9 months of hard work and has health risks. Even if we can imagine making surrogacy available to all, it’s hard to imagine making surrogates easily available to all. I say if you have the wealth to make this a job for someone, there’s nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of women in the world who have very healthy bodies and can tolerate a pregnancy well who don’t have high paying professional skills.

        So while we wait for the perfect egalitarian world to arrive where wealth has no meaning and everything is equally available to all, should we ban this? That’s the only question, really.

    • Whoresradish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I think choosing surrogacy over adoption says something about a person character. To me it says you care more about your genes than the child. And then you have pieces of shit like this russian oligarchs young wife.

      https://her.womenworking.com/24-yr-old-woman-21-children-wants-100-kids-childhood-dream-big-happy-family-547687

      I admit that I may be ignorant to parts adoption vs surrogacy, but I don’t like what I have seen online.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Wow so incredibly judgy.

        Like a lot of people who know nothing about the issue, you assume that adoption is easily available without limit and the reality is more complex. Unless you are taking special needs children into your home to care for them, don’t go around telling people they have an obligation to adopt.

        I know a couple who used surrogacy because she had a health issue that would make pregnancy high risk for her. If you want to get in her face and say she is not allowed to use technology to make a decision that everyone else gets to make, and she’s a bad person unless she adopts, that’s your fever dream to enjoy on your own.

        Banning the technology outright because of what a Russian oligarch does with it? Insane.

        • Whoresradish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Okay, so instead of insulting me, try to enlighten me. I already admitted that I have not had any direct influence with someone who chose surrogacy. What I have seen online is that adoption is cheaper and equally as long as surragacy. The only benefit I see is that the parent will know their genes are in the child, and a poor woman will get a paycheck for using her body. Please explain why I shouldn’t judge those who choose surragacy?

          https://adoption.org/why-is-it-so-hard-to-adopt

          • scarabic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            You’ve already ignored everything I’ve done to enlighten you on this topic. I’m not going to keep trying. Your attitudes about having children are simplistic and ignorant. These aren’t insults. An insult would be that you’re ugly too.