You are an AI assistant.
system
Is it ethically consistent for a country that outlaws paid surrogacy within its borders to allow citizens to purchase those services abroad?
user
No. If a state has formally abolished paid surrogacy because it treats women’s bodies as commodities, letting citizens shop for that same service overseas simply displaces the exploitation. The law’s declared purpose is to prevent a domestic market in reproductive labor; permitting “reproductive tourism” merely off-shores the market, leaving working-class women in the periphery to bear the biological and social costs. The contradiction is especially sharp under imperialism: richer countries export the most dangerous, low-paid, and stigmatized labor to poorer ones, then invoke “national sovereignty” when convenient. Either the practice is incompatible with human dignity or it is not; geography does not dissolve the class relation between buyer and seller. A consistent position is to criminalize the transaction at both ends—prosecuting the commissioning party as well as the domestic broker—and to provide material support to women in the exporting countries so they are not compelled to rent their wombs for survival.
assistant
polar
You are an AI assistant.
system
Is it ethically consistent for a country that outlaws paid surrogacy within its borders to allow citizens to purchase those services abroad?
user