All right, good morning, everybody. Sorry for the slightly rough voice, but I have had a very persistent fellow, which I appreciate and admire,

who's asking about a surrogacy when it comes to children, and the idea being that, let's say, a couple were to enter into some contract with the woman,

to maybe use the male sperm and the woman's eggs in order to get a baby

and the baby then in a sense would be contracted

maybe the money would exchange

and therefore the baby is bought and paid for

and is this UPB? In other words, can a couple pay another woman to

conceive and carry a child and then the child's, the custody of the child's would be transferred

to the new couple and is this UPB.

Now, of course, there's no force that is being deployed in the contract, right?

So everybody is voluntarily putting themselves in the contract, and the argument is,

and I understand the perspective, and I obviously really respect the contract. And the argument is, and I understand the perspective,

and I obviously really respect the question,

but the baby is not consenting.

The baby is not consenting to the contract.

Now, of course, I've made this case before,

but it's been a long time ago.

Is a contract valid if you can't consent at the time, but you do consent later? And it's a more important question

that it sounds, and it's less abstract than it sounds. So I'll give you the reason why I first

created this argument and hopefully it will make some kind of sense. So this is sort of way back at

the dawn of free domain back when the appendix radio was in the title because I'd never learned from Radio Shack, which when Radio Shack was first,

as an electronic store, when it was first created, radio was a big deal.

...