Legislation against IVF

  • Thread starter Thread starter DAWNCUROLE
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DAWNCUROLE

Guest
A local talk show host brought up an interesting point today. I was wondering if someone could help me answer his question. He asked that if we as Catholics are against IVF and that the frozen embryos are in fact human life (his words, not mine) than why are we (Catholics) not pushing for legislation to outlaw or ban IVF? Does anybody know if there is such legislation or if someone has pushed for it. It is a very thought provoking question?
 
To be honest, it would require a miracle to ever get the legislation passed.
 
I agree it would take a miracle to pass the legislation, but if we are going to try to stop stem cell research using frozen embryos and we are vocal about it, why are we not trying to stop the production of frozen embryos to begin with?
 
40.png
DAWNCUROLE:
I agree it would take a miracle to pass the legislation, but if we are going to try to stop stem cell research using frozen embryos and we are vocal about it, why are we not trying to stop the production of frozen embryos to begin with?
Click to expand...
Yes, Catholics should be in the forefront of opposing IVF.

In Vitro Fertilization, in fact, has led to an increase in pressure for embryonic stem cell research. One of the arguments used is that IVF creates a lot of “excess” embryos, which are frozen and eventually discarded. So the embryonic stem cell research proponents are saying, ‘why not use these excess embryos for research purposes, since they are going to be destroyed anyway.’

Do people who use IVF to have children realize that they have a lot more children than they are raising? Do they not care what happens to their excess embryos? IVF is at the root of the evil that has led to ESCR.
 
Well, Bush keeps saying that we cannot create life to destroy life but that is exactly what IVF does, so it is only logical that there should be legislation against it!
 
40.png
DAWNCUROLE:
A local talk show host brought up an interesting point today. I was wondering if someone could help me answer his question. He asked that if we as Catholics are against IVF and that the frozen embryos are in fact human life (his words, not mine) than why are we (Catholics) not pushing for legislation to outlaw or ban IVF? Does anybody know if there is such legislation or if someone has pushed for it. It is a very thought provoking question?
Click to expand...
There are groups, such as American Life League, who have been promoting this type of legislation. Unfortunately, it has fallen on deaf ears.

Yes, Catholics are called to oppose immoral procedures such as this. The Vatican has issued its statement on these types of technologies. I believe Catholics do attempt to influence legislation, and did at the time IVF became a reality in the late 70s.
 
But should acts and procedures that we consider immoral necessarily be illegal? Or can we allow people to have, dare I say it, “choice” on the matter?
 
My husband and I argue about this sometimes. He thinks IVF is okay even if it does create embryos that don’t survive because he says this "happens naturally whenever you are trying to get pregnant anyway."

He says it is ok because the real “purpose” behind it is to create life, which is a good thing. That it’s just like a deaf person getting a hearing aide, giving an infertile person the ability to be fertile.

But I agree with you guys, in our society it is doing more harm than good. I think adoption is the better alternative…as it seems like people care more about having their “own” biological children than they do about children in need of parents.

Can anyone explain for me exactly what is the difference between invitro fertilization and fertility drugs? Is one worse than the other?
 
40.png
norbert:
But should acts and procedures that we consider immoral necessarily be illegal? Or can we allow people to have, dare I say it, “choice” on the matter?
Click to expand...
Well we live in a culture that thinks that unethical practices should be legal, and can’t seem to draw a clear line of where it stops.
 
as far as i know most fertility drugs are fine. drugs that only assist in the natural conception of children are licit and good.

IVF is when the sperm of the man and the egg of the woman are taken by doctors and placed in a dish so that fertilization can take place; then once they have the embryo they artificially place it into the womans body so that it can continue to grow in her womb.
 
40.png
norbert:
But should acts and procedures that we consider immoral necessarily be illegal? Or can we allow people to have, dare I say it, “choice” on the matter?
Click to expand...
We do not have the moral freedom to choose evil.
 
40.png
martino:
We do not have the moral freedom to choose evil.
Click to expand...
What does that mean? Does it mean that all immoral acts should be illegal? Masturbation? Using condoms? Cussing?
 
Not all immoral acts should be illegal. Some immoral acts are legislated against, such as murder, theft, assault, rape, (and in the relatively recent past, adultery, fornication, and sodomy.) These things must be decided by legislatures.

But there is certainly good reason to legislate against acts which treat human beings as products rather than persons. That would be the case with IVF.
 
40.png
norbert:
But should acts and procedures that we consider immoral necessarily be illegal? Or can we allow people to have, dare I say it, “choice” on the matter?
Click to expand...
Yes, we should work to make them illegal and no we cannot allow “choice” for immoral things.
 
Christian4life said:
My husband and I argue about this sometimes. He thinks IVF is okay even if it does create embryos that don’t survive because he says this "happens naturally whenever you are trying to get pregnant anyway."

He says it is ok because the real “purpose” behind it is to create life, which is a good thing. That it’s just like a deaf person getting a hearing aide, giving an infertile person the ability to be fertile.

But I agree with you guys, in our society it is doing more harm than good. I think adoption is the better alternative…as it seems like people care more about having their “own” biological children than they do about children in need of parents.

Can anyone explain for me exactly what is the difference between invitro fertilization and fertility drugs? Is one worse than the other?
Click to expand...

You are familiar with the teaching that all sex acts between spouses must be both unitive and procreative, correct? This would be the reason contraception is wrong-- it is not procreative. The reason IVF is wrong is because it is not unitive. The “act” of creating life must be through intercourse between spouses. IVF creates an embryo in a lab, denying the unitive portion of the act. Additionally, IVF treats human life as a commodity, an affront to the dignity of each human person and their right to be born through a loving, unitive act between their parents-- this is even more heinous when heterologous IVF is used (donor sperm or egg).

The Catechism covers this very thoroughly and effectively.

Fertility drugs, such as clomid for women or viagra for men, are not immoral because they merely correct a defect and allow a natural act of intercourse to take place.
 
40.png
1ke:
Yes, we should work to make them illegal and no we cannot allow “choice” for immoral things.
Click to expand...
So, everything immoral should be illegal? According to which standard of morality? Yours? Should masturbation be punishable by time in jail? What about skipping Mass?
 
40.png
norbert:
But should acts and procedures that we consider immoral necessarily be illegal? Or can we allow people to have, dare I say it, “choice” on the matter?
Click to expand...
Well I wonder if that was what Jeffrey Dalmer was thinking:hmmm: :eek: Where is the line Norbert?
 
40.png
JimG:
Not all immoral acts should be illegal. Some immoral acts are legislated against, such as murder, theft, assault, rape, (and in the relatively recent past, adultery, fornication, and sodomy.) These things must be decided by legislatures.

But there is certainly good reason to legislate against acts which treat human beings as products rather than persons. That would be the case with IVF.
Click to expand...
Murder, theft, assault, and rape are illegal because if they were allowed civil society could not exist. Those acts are not illegal because they are immoral.
 
40.png
norbert:
Murder, theft, assault, and rape are illegal because if they were allowed civil society could not exist. Those acts are not illegal because they are immoral.
Click to expand...
Murder is legal it was made legal in Roe v Wade,before the unborn child is murdered he or she is assaulted by the doctors and the childs life is stolen under the premis of “choice” even though that was never an option to the victim:nope:
 
It’s true that legislators do, or ought to, pass laws that favor those things which are beneficial to civil society, and pass laws against those things that harm civil society. If children are treated as commodities, I do believe that is bad for society. If we can create them and destroy them at will, which is what IVF does, it has numerous bad consequences for society.

With IVF, one might soon be able to open a boutique child shop, ordering your child with all those characteristics you want, and of course no defects, probably with a money-back guarantee. (If he doesn’t work out, send him back and we’ll use his parts for research.)

But then the child will have become only a consumer good, no longer a person.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top