The man with 400 children

Newsweek tells the story of a sperm donor:

[Kirk] Maxey, 51, happens to be one of the most prolific sperm donors in the country. Between 1980 and 1994, he donated at a Michigan clinic twice a week. He’s looked at the records of his donations, multiplied by the number of individual vials each donation produced, and estimated the success of each vial resulting in a pregnancy. By his own calculations, he concluded that he is the biological father of nearly 400 children, spread across the state and possibly the country.

At the time, there was little screening for disease or genetic issues, so now Mr. Maxey is crusading for better regulation of the industry. He is worried, among other things, that some of his progeny might meet each other and have children of their own, even though they are brother and sister. Recently, two of his offspring–his daughters–traced him down as their real father. Now they get together sometimes. Here they are, going out for ice cream:

Sperm donor & two of his offspring

List the different ways this is wrong.

HT: Kirk Andersen

Holy Innocents Day

Today, December 28, is Holy Innocents Day, the commemoration of the death of those children under two years old slaughtered by King Herod in his vain attempt to slay the Christ child.

Child sacrifice, as when parents would kill their infants as a sacrifice to Moloch, is a sign in the Bible of the most demonic kind of idolatry. So it is today in its new manifestations of abortion, the harvest of embryos, and the casualties of reproductive engineering. No ideology can be correct if it condones such evil. I propose that the Church use Holy Innocents Day as a time to pray against such practices, to work to make them illegal, and to persuade people not to slay little children as Herod did.

Democrats squabbling and buying votes for the Health Care Reform Bill

Here is a fascinating article on the battles that are brewing among Democrats over the Health Care Reform bill, now that a delicately compromised Senate bill will have to be reconciled with a delicately–but differently–compromised House bill. The story contains this tidbit, the price Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb) extorted in order to compromise his pro-life convictions:

Nelson, who got the federal government to pick up the cost of any Medicaid expansion under the health reform bill in the state of Nebraska forever. Republicans said Democrats have refused to say which state would get about $100 million inserted into the bill on behalf of a still unidentified university hospital.

“This process is not legislation. This process is corruption,” said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.). “And it’s a shame that that’s the only way we can come to consensus in this country is to buy votes.”

Nebraska would get its Medicaid bills picked up by the rest of the nation’s taxpayers FOREVER! What a deal.

What the Senate did with abortion in the Health Care bill

To placate pro-life Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska, the Senate worked out this compromise in the Health Care Reform bill:

Under the new abortion provisions, states can opt out of allowing plans to cover abortion in the insurance exchanges the bill would set up. The exchanges are designed to serve individuals who lack coverage through their jobs, with most receiving federal subsidies to buy insurance. Enrollees in plans that cover abortion procedures would pay with separate checks — one for abortion, one for any other health-care services.

This was an effort to comport with the 32-year prohibition against federal funding for abortions, but the Nelson compromise is a softening of the House language, which was written by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.). The Stupak amendment forbid any insurer in the exchange "to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion" — a position that abortion rights advocates suggested would have led to many insurance providers dropping abortion coverage.

Neither pro-lifers nor pro-deathers are happy.

Climate change and population control

At the Copenhagen global warming conclave, the Chinese are pushing another approach to cutting down carbon emissions: population control. As you read this, keep in mind what China does, enforcing the “one child” policy by forced abortions:

Population and climate change are intertwined but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming, according to Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) .

"Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture," said Zhao, who is a member of the Chinese government delegation.

Many studies link population growth with emissions and the effect of climate change.

"Calculations of the contribution of population growth to emissions growth globally produce a consistent finding that most of past population growth has been responsible for between 40 per cent and 60 percent of emissions growth," so stated by the 2009 State of World Population, released earlier by the UN Population Fund.

Although China's family planning policy has received criticism over the past three decades, Zhao said that China's population program has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society.

As a result of the family planning policy, China has seen 400 million fewer births, which has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions a year, Zhao said.

Could the climate panic mindset lead to the same policy here?

UPDATE: A Canadian journalist is already advocating that all the world’s governments emulate China in imposing by law a one child limit.

Health Care bill negotiations

Senators are negotiating what kind of health care bill will be put up for a vote. As things stand right now, the government-run public option is out, but abortion funding is back in. Anything the Senate passes, though, will have to be further negotiated with the House of Representatives, whose bill has both.