An interesting story from CNN’s AC360 blog about 11 mothers in Virginia who selected sperm from the same man when they went in for artificial insemination. From the story:
Well, while reporting this story, we looked at a case in Virginia where
one man’s genetic profile has proven especially popular. He is said to
be of German descent, tall and athletic, and is responsible for
"fathering" as many as 20 children through 11 different women.He
chooses to remain anonymous, but the mothers have established an
incredible connection to each other through a Web site called
DonorSiblingRegistry.com. The site allows mothers who conceive children
with donated sperm to connect with one another.
My question is this: Why can a man be the father to children by any number of women he wants, but he is not allowed to marry more than one at a time? Not that I’m arguing for polygamy (I’ve often said it is way too hard making marriage work with one woman to even consider a second) but isn’t it somewhat strange that a man can sire children with any number of women he wants, and for that matter that a woman can have children by any number of men she wants?
I should also point out that I’m not arguing for laws against sex out of wedlock, but I am questioning why we deal with some moral issues with laws and not others. There are obvious cases where moral and legal issues overlap: murder, rape, assault, etc. But when everyone involved are consenting adults who are not harming or adversely affecting others why is the government inserting itself into the equation with laws?
Discover more from Befuddled
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Befuddled 
I recently read somewhere an effective argument against polygamy. Essentially it said that in cultures where polygamy is condoned, a few alpha males get many wives which leaves the lesser males with no prospects and much time on their hands for mischief.
Makes sense to me. I have a feeling that many of the cultural norms we have today and which we often ascribe to religious mores are actually grounded in long forgotten bad experiences. Religions then adopted and carried those lessons forward so as a society we may have no recall of the events that caused those moral norms to be adopted but we inherently know that they are right.
I still think it is interesting that our society has recently evolved the ability for women to bear children by complete strangers and we don’t actually have a law that we have to overturn to allow that. Until the last generation or two most women would not have had the means to support a child on their own so why weren’t there laws against impregnating women outside of wedlock? It would seem to me that our society would have wanted to legislate against that as much as polygamy. Or maybe there were laws against it, but I seriously doubt it. I can’t see men of any era legislating against their own freedom to procreate with whomever they wish.