INDIA LEGALIZED surrogacy in 2002 as part of a long-term push to promote medical tourism. Since 1991, when the country's new free-market policies took effect, private money has flowed in, fueling construction of world-class hospitals that cater to foreigners. Surrogacy tourism has grown steadily here as word gets around that babies can be incubated at a low price and without government red tape. Patel's clinic charges about $15,000 to $20,000 for the entire process, from in vitro fertilization to delivery, whereas in the handful of American states that allow paid surrogacy, bringing a child to term costs between $50,000 and $100,000. "One of the nicest things about [India] is that the women don't drink or smoke," adds Jordan, the Delhi surrogacy customer... Dependable numbers are hard to come by, but at minimum Indian surrogacy services now attract hundreds of Western clients each year... There are at least 350 other fertility clinics around India, although it's difficult to say how many offer surrogacy services since the government doesn't track the industry. Mumbai's Hiranandani Hospital, which boasts a sizable surrogacy program, trains outside fertility doctors to identify and recruit promising candidates. The Confederation of Indian Industry predicts that medical tourism, including surrogacy, could generate $2.3 billion in annual revenue by 2012. "Surrogacy is the new adoption," says Delhi fertility doctor Anoop Gupta.Similar surrogacy tourism is happening around the world, in the Czech republic and even in rural, white areas in the US like the one where I work, poor women carry the children of the urban upper classes in exchange for $8-10,000. Again, what if the situation were reversed? What if science showed what many of us suspect to be true: the upper classes, like purebred dogs, are more prone to neuroses and even, perhaps, psychoses as well as a host of rich peoples' diseases like gluten intolerance? What if rich women were forced to be the surrogates for poor women so the poor women could continue to work and then the poor women would raise the child in the seemingly healthier environment of knowing that life is not about "happiness" and the project of eternal youth? So now we have heterosexual couples with money renting the wombs of poor women so they can have the full rights and benefits of being married and, perhaps more importantly, reproductive. But if modern love says reproductive and married is good, it does not think that reproductive and married is good if it's same sex. That's why, up until now, same sex couples- even when reproductive and married- have often been denied the right to be with their partners in the hospital. Listing the usual litany of heart-breaking stories of partners denied access as their loved ones die, the Obama administration is now demanding that any hospital receiving Medicaid/Medicare funding MUST not discriminate against anyone on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Again, if the situation were reversed and straight couples were denied visitation rights, most people would see that things need to change. But there is something else to this story too: what about people who aren't in couples but have intimate and even sexual relationships with people who are not their spouses? They too will be allowed to choose who visits them in the hospital by choosing a "circle of intimates." And that's a good thing. Couples who are same-sex have been discriminated against, but they don't deserve the right to be near sick loved ones by virtue of their coupling anymore than the Kings deserve their rights and privileges by virtue of being wealthy, white and straight. Humans ought to be allowed to decide who they want in the room when they die- regardless of marital status, reproductive practices, or any other measure of prestige. It is a human right. And ultimately, modern love has lost sight of that which is human in all of us. So caught up in fitting the state-enforced requirement of "reproductive long term couple," we have lost our ability to ask whether it's okay to rent someone else's womb or even reproduce in our last decades of life or how to treat a dying person in a hospital. That's because modern love is not so much about love as about being "good citizens." And it's time that we modern citizens demand an end to state and economic interference in our love lives- whether in the form of privileges like the Kings, businesses like surrogacy, or punishments like hospitals denying non-coupled and non-heterosexuals their rights.