Pope Francis called Monday for a universal ban on the “despicable” practice of surrogate motherhood, as he included the “commercialization” of pregnancy in an annual speech listing threats to global peace and human dignity.

In a foreign policy address to ambassadors accredited to the Holy See, Francis lamented that 2024 had dawned at a time in history in which peace is “increasingly threatened, weakened and in some part lost.”

Citing Russia’s war in Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, migration, climate crises and the “immoral” production of nuclear and conventional weapons, Francis delivered a lengthy laundry list of the ills afflicting humanity and the increasing violation of international humanitarian law that allows them.

But Francis also listed smaller-scale issues that he said were threats to peace and human dignity, including surrogacy. Francis said the life of the unborn child must be protected and not “suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking.”

  • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    11 months ago

    ban on the “despicable” practice of surrogate motherhood.

    Wasn’t Mary technically a surrogate?

    • june@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think so, no. She didn’t carry the baby for another person and Jesus was of her DNA. She was supposedly made pregnant by god rather than another human (some folks wonder if god actually came down and fucked her or just placed a baby in her womb, which I think is an interesting thing to think about). Either way, surrogacy generally means the woman carries a child that doesn’t have her DNA, but Christian theology, across denominations and sects, all seem to agree he was fully human which would come from Mary.

      • h3rm17@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        “Hey Mary” “Yes, Joseph” “So, you are pregnant…” “Yes! I told you so already! It was god!” “Yeah, about that, remember the angel, the other day, Gabriel I think it was… big flaming sword you said right? Was that… was that a metaphor or something?” “…” “I mean, you can tell me, we are in this together Mary, I’d just like to know” “No Joseph, no, he had a physical, real, big throbbing sword!” “Throbbing?” “Flaming, Joseph, flaming… YOU NEVER LISTEN TO ME”

      • Chriswild@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Generally it’s surrogacy even if the baby has their DNA. If two identical twins could theoretically carry the other’s baby as a surrogate despite having the same DNA.

        Either God raped her or God gave her IVF against her knowledge. Because she raised the child as her own regardless and it’s not like they could DNA test.

        Religion is fucking stupid

  • FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I am no religious expert, but going by what I remember from church, Jesus was sent here for all of us, so wouldn’t that make the Virgin Mary basically a surrogate?

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Jesus was sent here for all of us

      Sure let’s check the Bible

      He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”

      Matthew 15:24

      The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?” He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.

      Mark 13:10-11

      Uh oh. It seems like Jesus wasnt sent for everyone only for a small group of loyal followers from one ethnic group.

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    “Commercializing pregnancy”

    Yeah, allowing my friend living with lupus to have a healthy biological child. They treated the surrogate as a member of the family, even long after the birth. Fuck you, pope.

  • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “Unborn child must be protected and not suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking”.

    Until he is born that is, right?

  • Utsob Roy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It is interesting to see the Pope using secular arguments instead of simply saying God won’t approve (which is completely valid from a religious perspective). The invocation of God in any serious opinion is silly, and now even religious leaders know that.

  • ZeroMmX@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Pope Francis can Sur-a-get deez nuts in his mouth.

    Oh wait… He might like that…

  • the_q@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    You figure he’d be on board with creating more kids for Catholic priest to rape and molest.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I would highly suggest people look into the international surrogacy programs/companies and their issues. I want to say Radiolab may have done a podcast about it. Basically western couples think they are giving a life changing amount of money to a women in poverty, but in reality the companies pocket most of the money and the women are kept in substandard conditions sometimes.

      It’s not something I think we should outright ban, but the industry is in dire need of international attention and regulation.

    • limonfiesta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      No, that’s not what’s happening.

      Poor women and women in poor counties are used as baby ovens for the wealthy, or those with the means to rent their wombs. Which is why he specifically refers to it as the “commercialization”.

      He’s saying that’s exploitive and immoral as there as children waiting to be adopted. So instead of “renting” a poor women’s womb, adopt a child instead.

      Also, FWIW I’m pro-choice, but that doesn’t mean I should pretend everyone who thinks differently is evil.

      Opposing abortion isn’t always about a misogynistic need to control women. For some people it’s a genuine belief that life begins at conception, which is what Pope Francis appears to sincerely believe.

      That doesn’t extend to everyone, and I’d go so far as to say most of the Evangelical American pro-life movement are just reactionary hateful shitstains who are genuine misogynists that wouldn’t hesitate to get their mistress an abortion.

      Anyways, just my $0.02

  • markus99@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    Here come the mental liberals. Liking the pope until he says something that don’t fit with their global homo agenda. Disgusting. All religions are bad! Completely doing mental gymnastics when is Islam killing and terrorising the world. There is no cure for this people