Local lesbian accepts biological limitation?

Interesting HuffintonPost article Lesbian Baby-Making for the Entitled Generation muses on the subject of same-sex procreation. At first, she admits to the desire to be able to make a baby with her partner that would be genetically related to both of them:

I want to have babies the way straight people do.

I don’t mean that in a ’70s euphemism “makin’-babies” kind of way. What I mean is that I want the ease, the convenience, the — dare I say it — naturalness that straight people have when starting a family. I want both the simple beauty of two people loving each other so much that they’d like to see more of the other in the world, and I want that simple beauty to be translated into scientific terms of fairness: chromosomes and DNA given in equal amounts from two parents.

She’s not alone in that desire, even though it’s unusual to admit it. Usually people don’t admit it until I suggest that the right to make genetic offspring together could be traded for federal recognition of same-sex relationships, then it turns out that the abstract right to make genetic offspring together is the most essential demand of all, far above the “1,037 benefits” that they claim to need. So it is amazing progress that someone is admitting that desire up front:

Why can’t my girlfriend and I have a baby that shares our DNA? Why can’t an egg from each of us be scrambled up and sprinkled with sperm? It seems so easy! Try harder scientists! Make this a priority.

But the great thing is that she seems to realize it is an unreasonable and immature demand, and the article is actually urging people to come to terms with biological limitations and not worry that same-sex couples cannot have children together:

Perhaps in a couple decades science will have perfected a way for two women to have a baby that is genetically related to both of them, but by then I hope to have figured out for myself that it doesn’t matter, not really. In the end we all make our own families in one way or another.

Of course, she still is expecting “science” to perfect same-sex procreation soon, but at least she’s admitting it isn’t important. That’s progress, it’s just another step to accepting that it isn’t a right and would be better to prohibit it and trade it for CU’s defined as “marriage minus conception rights” that actually give couples the things that are important to them.

About John Howard