1. Since I wrote those posts about surrogacy in 2016, I have come to believe that the arrangements are not just “icky,” not just creations of “pre-unethical conditions,” but actually unethical. The process is too close to baby-selling; I believe allowing surrogacies helps degrade the respect for infant life as well as the life of the unborn. Perhaps, if these surrogate contracts are to continue at all, they must include the appointment of a third party guardian ad litem whose duty is to protect the interests of the unborn child at all stages of the pregnancy right up until child birth.

2. The Texas-California conflict is as ugly a situation as the Case of the Unwanted Triplet discussed in Part 1. As with that scenario, this one highlights the cruelty and breach of all ethical systems inherent in the practice of abortion. The “intended parents” wanted the unborn child they had rented out a room for in the surrogate’s womb to die because it wasn’t going to be perfect. California, of course, having descended into a such an ethically warped culture that it is virtually an ethics Bizarro World, sees nothing wrong with that set of priorities.

3. McKenna West (above) has to be ranked an Ethics Hero here. Her actions have saved a life. So has the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision: were abortion still treated as a constitutionally protected right, “Baby Gabriel” would have had no sanctuary.

4. Ken Paxton surely recognized the case as campaign manna from heaven. Were his actions motivated by the opportunity for a political boost as he tries to hold on the a U.S. Senate seat for Republicans? It doesn’t matter. We must judge the ethical nature of conduct based on its intended effects, not the motivations behind it. Paxton may not have cared about McKenna or Gabriel at all. Nonetheless, he did the ethical thing. That is what matters.