Close Twins Mother decieving Homosexual

A homosexual man convinced a woman to bare children via surrogacy. The male friend was not known to be homosexual until after the birth. The Twins were taken from the hospital by the homosexual male and are living with the same sex partner. The courts will be looking at the definition of Mother.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2206664/Cindy-Close-Woman-48-twins-long-time-friend-claimed-just-surrogate.html

Woman, 48, who had twins with gay friend in custody battle ‘after he said she was just a surrogate and he’s keeping babies with his partner’
• Cindy Close and Marvin McMurrey decided to have a child together as they were in their 40s and not married; they planned to co-parent
• Close fell pregnant with twins through use of donor eggs
• But when she gave birth in July she was told she was only a surrogate
• McMurrey revealed he was gay and children would live with his partner
• Now in court battle for custody - and Close only has visitation rights

abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8823108

The case is drawing national attention because the basic argument hinges on what the definition of a mother is. Close says even though she and McMurray had no romantic involvement, they had agreed to co-parent the twins. But McMurray’s attorney disagrees, though she won’t discuss her arguments to us.

“These are children, live human beings, and nothing says that their best interest would be served by being in the media,” McMurray’s attorney, Ellen Yarrell said.

cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2012/09/24/erin-mattingly-pkg-texas-court-debates-motherhood.cnn

video concerning the story can be seen here

So, is there some kind of Gay agenda disrupting, destroying the notion of Marriage, Mother, Family…using Courts to get their ideas across?

What sort of thinking caused a man to lie, and then use that lie to get children into the arms of a same sex evironment? Is this is the best interest of the Children?

That sounds a pretty normal part of the culture, just use other people for their own benefit, nothing new.

Seriously? You’re going to paint all homosexuals with that brush?

that’s pretty much the definition of a practicing homosexual. Their relations are 1) immoral and 2) simply for selfish pleasure. There’s nothing self giving about them.

I paint homosexual acts with that brush, just using other people.

Homosexual acts are, by their very nature, oriented towards the self. It would stand to reason that any person with SSA who regularly engages in homosexual acts are predisposed to being selfish or using others for their own pleasure.

A gay couple is no different than a heterosexual couple where one or both people are sterile.

Please prove your statement. I would agree with you if you were talking about a couple using contraception.

I dislike homosexual acts as much as the next Catholic, but this has not been my experience at all. All but two of the homosexuals I’ve know and been friends with are good people apart from their sexual tendencies. You should not paint the entire group by the actions of a few. What this person did was despicable, but I know that most of the gays I know would never even dream of doing something like this.

Dislike the sin all you want, but a person’s sin does not, usually, define them as a whole. It is statements like this that make gays think the church is against them, when in fact we welcome them as brothers and sisters, and work to lead them to chaste lives with God.

Not so. There is a very basic difference.

OK, I just read the story. This guy being gay has absolutely nothing to do with the situation. If he was straight and his partner was another woman, nothing would change.

What I don’t understand is how he could legally just take the kids. From what I understand if anyone gets custody of the kids it is usually the mother. I have a feeling that the mom is going to end up getting these kids because there was no surrogacy agreement beforehand…this is at least what the article suggests.

Anyway, him being gay has absolutely nothing to do with what happened.

How do you know that?

So you’re saying that every single homosexual out there is a liar.

I guess if one Catholic lies, an atheist is justified in saying we all do.

This story isn’t really about sexual orientation. The guy’s sexual orientation is incidental to the story.

It’s a good example of what happens when we turn children into commodities, though. Pain and confusion result. And the children suffer the most.

It is worth mentioning that a majority group is never taken as a representative of his entire group, yet a member of a minority group is. And it is being done in this thread. If this man’s partner was a woman, say an infertile one, and her husband were to pull the same stunt this man allegedly did, would it warrant a thread on this forum? Would there be several posts mentioning the immoral nature of all heterosexual couples? I think not.

You seem not to understand that heterosexual acts are not intrinsically immoral, they are not intrinsically based on the use of another person.

While I have pity for this woman, what she did was obviously wrong in the first place - what was she thinking when this man wouldn’t even have sex with her to try and create these children that she so desperately wanted? What normal heterosexual man would opt for in-vitro fertilization instead of the usual way of making babies? I mean, seriously.

I feel worst for the babies.

Praying for them. The best outcome would be if they would go back to the mom, even if they aren’t her bio-children. The dad is using them, probably as a way of keeping his much-younger gay honey.

What do you mean how do I know that? Well technically if he was straight then maybe he would have just had a baby with his partner and this wouldn’t have happened. But from what I understand, this is the basic story:

Man pretends he is going to raise a child with a woman. Man and woman get in vitro fertilization and woman gives birth. Man claims woman is surrogate and tries to take the babies. Woman wants the children back.

If the man was gay or straight, the story would still be the same.

Anyway, I wonder if the woman or man is actually lying. I wonder if there was a surrogacy agreement and the woman is going back on it. I don’t know either of these people personally so I have no idea.

Please tell me how consensual homosexual activity is intrinsically based on the use of another person? I personally believe that homosexuals can show their love physically just as my wife and I can.

I thought the fact that the woman was 48 is why they chose in vitro. Also, your last sentence is a HUGE assumption based on nothing.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.