Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Raymann; sodpoodle
I agree thzt the term "playing God" is too vague to use for most acts of technical mastery over the physical world, especially since God gave humans substantial (if not total) mastery of this kind ("fill the earth and subdue it").

The line is drawn, I would argue, with the manipulation of other human beings in ways that are de-personalized or de-humanized. I'm not talking about genuinely therapeutic medical interventions,since this is all legitimately orietnted toward restoring the human being to normal healthy function: curing diseases, correcting disorders, healing injuries, etc.

When I'm speaking of "manipulation," I'm talking about interventions that do not restore the normal healthy function, but tend toward redefining what it is to be human (as if we were nothing but malleable "material.")

To give an example which distinguishes the one from the other: say a couple suffers from infertility because the wife's fallopian tubes are blocked, and the husband's hormone profile is out of whack. Surgery to unblock the fallopian tube, and hormonal therapy to get the guy's hormonenumbers up where they should be---resulting in their ability to achieve pregnancy in the normal way ---would be absolutely legitimate.

But artificial reproduction technologies which do not repair sexual intercourse, but replace it ---say, laboratory-based baby-making--- would not be legitimate.

Why? Because such techniques do nothing to heal their sexual reproductive function, but replace it in a way that does not restore their marital sexual wholeness.

That' s not "playing God", exactly. That's more like failing to play human.

37 posted on 10/01/2011 1:29:09 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (In theory. there's no difference between theory and practice. But in practice, there is. -Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: Mrs. Don-o

“Why? Because such techniques do nothing to heal their sexual reproductive function, but replace it in a way that does not restore their marital sexual wholeness.”

And getting an artificial leg doesn’t restore the leg’s function but replaces it in a why that does not restore the body’s wholeness.

Still not getting you. First of all, there’s nothing here that suggests there was anything more complicated then using frozen sperm and a turkey baster. Even if there was so what? We’re not talking about genetic enhancement or any other sort of manipulation. The children born are as normal as any other.

I just don’t see how the only ‘humanizing’ way to conceive is by bumping uglies.

You were very right about man’s mastery over the world, and ourselves. But like the issue with the leg I can come up with a thousand different ways man alters himself/environment to make it suit him and I don’t see why out of all of those, reproduction is somehow different.


38 posted on 10/01/2011 3:52:08 PM PDT by Raymann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

A very thoughtful response - thank you.


39 posted on 10/01/2011 4:43:34 PM PDT by sodpoodle (God is ignoring me - because He is watching you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson