Fooling around with basic gender identity leads to commodification of human souls

Robert Oscar Lopez has an interesting pedigree.  In his frequent contributions to The American Thinker, he often has occasion to refer to it, as he did in his most recent essay there:

Just in case you missed it, I am bisexual and don’t hide it or apologize for it.  And my mom was a lesbian.

His position on surrogate parenting is therefore not easily given to caricature:

Like an obsessive-compulsive one-note Charlie, my refrain has been, for years: children have an inalienable right to a mother and father, cannot be bought or sold, and are entitled to know their origins.  Whether it is straight people or gay people using divorce, surrogacy, trafficking, or any other means to deny people these rights, I oppose it.
This is a teachable moment because it reveals a great deal about what makes the Human Rights Campaign tick.  They’re after your kids, plain and simple; all their other issues are mere window dressing.
They have convinced themselves that gays are a tribe unto themselves, so their consuming goal is to populate the tribe so they don’t disappear.
Parenthood is their great white whale.  They want to have children to love them and call them Mom and Dad.  They need to get those children from you because biology prevents them from siring them naturally.  Gentlemen readers, these folks are trying to find a way to get the sperm out of your testicles and into their laboratories; lady readers, these folks need to find a way to implant an embryo of their sperm in your womb, keep you obedient during the gestation, and take your baby away forever.
The main item on the gay lobby’s agenda is patently insane.  People don’t generally want to let lesbians milk sperm out of their testicles.  People don’t usually like the idea of gay men gestating babies in their wombs and then taking them away.  (And no, “visitation” plans where these gamete donors get to see their progeny a few times a month are not a good arrangement; that stuff’s really creepy.)
And at least with me, these HRC lackeys cannot pull the old “are you saying my children are worth any less?” routine.  Just because you control a human being doesn’t mean that’s your child.  Even if someone is your child, criticizing you is not the same as insulting your child.  This is basic, but somehow the HRC manages to whitewash the complexities.  Despite all the choreographed photographs of happy gay couples with children, people generally do not like growing up and knowing that half of them was sold to a gay couple.

With that in mind, consider the case of a lesbian couple that were disappointed in the child they got through such artificial means - on the basis of race:

A lesbian couple walks into a sperm bank….Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

Actually, it’s not a joke. The lesbian couple did not technically walk into a sperm bank but they did order sperm from a bank in the Chicago suburb of Downers Grove. Jennifer Cramblett and Amanda Zinkon, a White couple living in Ohio selected sperm from a White male provided by the Midwest Sperm Bank. Cramblett used the sperm to become impregnated with her first child, but just months before little Payton arrived in August of 2012 Cramblett received a communication from the donor bank informing her she had been given the wrong sperm.

Her baby would be Black.

Unsurprisingly Cramblett is suing the sperm bank for “wrongful birth and breach of warranty.” While she can’t be blamed for being a little miffed that she did not receive the product she purchased, her reasoning behind the lawsuit is unnerving to say the least. Here are some of Cramblett’s main concerns with now being forced to be the mother of a Black child as laid out in the lawsuit:

On August 21, 2012, Jennifer gave birth to Payton, a beautiful, obviously mixed-race baby girl. Jennifer bonded with Payton easily and she and Amanda love her very much. Even so, Jennifer lives each day with fears, anxieties and uncertainty about her future and Payton’s future.

What kind of anxieties, you may ask? Just the typical anxieties of any normal, bigoted parent trying to raise a Black child.

As just one example, getting a young daughter’s hair cut is not particularly stressful for most mothers, but to Jennifer it is not a routine matter, because Payton has hair typical of an African American girl. To get a decent cut, Jennifer must travel to a black neighborhood, far from where she lives, where she is obviously different in appearance, and not overtly welcome.

So Cramblett is emotionally distressed by her Black baby because now she’s going to have to travel to a Black neighborhood to get her baby’s hair cut.  Quelle horreur! Note to Ms.Cramblett: I live in the suburbs with my black family and mostly white people and we also must travel out of our town for decent haircuts. It’s actually nice to have a reason to take the kids to different areas where they can interact with different races. We call that “mingling.” I shudder to think of poor little Payton growing up with anxieties about those “scary black people” because her mother can’t handle a trip to the beauty shop once every two months.

This LGBTQ  push for special consideration has nothing to do with human rights or basic human nobility.  It's narcissism pure and simple.  Procuring a baby through sic-fi means is about your own validation.  It's a badge, an accessory that dares the world to consider you abnormal.  And when things go awry, such as your kid being a race other than what you specified, it's about your outrage, not about a soul infinitely precious to God, and the question of where that soul is going to find unconditional love during his or her time here on this plane.

Ours is a very monstrous society.