Bushites bash queer sperm

BUSHITES ban queer men's anonymous sperm:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/05/05/national/a114941D36.DTL

If you're a man who has engaged in male-male sex
(within the past five years),
the FDA wants to ban you from donating sperm
anonymously.

But the new FDA rules won't prevent queer men from serving as "directed" sperm donors
(that is, as donors whose identity is known to the female recipient
and her doctor).


........................................................................

[ Commentary by TBL:

(1) The FDA shows an unfair double standard for out-queer men,
versus "other" men (closet-queers, straights, etc.).

The "other" men are those who say,
whether truthfully or falsely,
that they haven't
done any male-male sex in the previous five years.

Is this double standard based in part on prejudice and ignorance,
as queer leaders say? Yes.




(2) However, in my opinion,
there's an even more important issue here.

For the sake of the prospective children,
I believe that ALL anonymous sperm donations
should be phased out --
for everyone,
whether straight or non-straight;
regardless of sexual orientations or practices.

All sperm donors should "come out"
of their genetic closets.

Why?

(2a)
Because anonymous sperm donations can create half-siblings
who don't know they're related at all.
And if such boys and girls, raised separately,
happen to meet as adults,
then they may well be attracted to each other
(partly because of similar pheromones).
And if they're straight or bi, they may unwittingly inbreed,
which is genetically risky.
And if they marry, and then later find out (thru DNA testing)
that they're half-siblings,
then they may feel severe guilt, shame, etc.
And they'll probably feel grief over being forced to separate
from the person whom they love.


(2b) Also, as genomic sciences advance,
each child will need to know more and more
about the genomes
of her parents and her grandparents.

If the child's genetic father is anonymous,
then half of this needed knowledge is hidden.


(3) Would non-anonymous ("directed" ) sperm-donating
be a hassle
for some women and some couples?
Yes.

But the child's interests,
not the prospective parent's interests,
should come first.

If a prospective mother cannot stand to know
her sperm-donor's identity,
then she should consider adopting a child who
has already been born,
and who already desperately needs a loving parent
(or two, or more). ]


........................................................................




+ more news links:

LARAMIE freaks out over SNOW-PHALLUS:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/05/1736124.php

...........

MARIJUANA lobbyists dress corporately:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/05/05/MNGJACK9UK1.DTL

...............

SF QUEER NEWS, weekly:

http://sfbaytimes.com/

.............

NUDES in the news:

http://www.bayareanaturists.org/news

,,,,,,,,,,,,,
###