Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vatican condemns IVF, the Pill (Why is this so surprising alert!)
Reuters ^ | December 12, 2008 | Philip Pullella

Posted on 12/12/2008 6:09:21 AM PST by NYer

THE Vatican today said life was sacred at every stage of its existence and condemned artificial fertilisation, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning and drugs which block pregnancy from taking hold.

A long-awaited document on bioethics by the Vatican's doctrinal body also said the so-called "morning after pill" and the drug RU-486, which blocks the action of hormones needed to keep a fertilised egg implanted in the uterus, fall "within the sin of abortion" and are gravely immoral.

"Dignitas Personae" (dignity of a person), an Instruction of Certain Bioethical Questions," is an attempt to bring the Church up to date with recent advances in science and medicine.

It said human life deserved respect "from the very first stages of its existence (and) can never be reduced merely to a group of cells."

"The human embryo has, therefore, from the very beginning, the dignity proper to a person," the docment by the Congregations of the Doctrine of the Faith said.

It said most forms of artifical fertilisation "are to be excluded" because "they substitute for the conjugal act ... which alone is truly worthy of responsible procreation".

It condemned in-vitro fertilisation, saying the techniques "proceed as if the human embryo were simply a mass of cells to be used, selected and discarded."

The highly technical document said only adult stem cell research was moral because embryonic stem cell research involved the destruction of embryos.

In the document, the Vatican also defended its right to intervene on such matters.

(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: catholic; cloning; ivf; moralabsolutes; pope; prolife; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 351-367 next last
To: rintense
Now, considering that England has government run healthcare, and IVF is paid for by the government... who do you think benefits from extra embryos? Here's a hint... its medical research.

I don't think you realize what
you are really talking about...



...so here is a picture of Dr. Josef Mengele
(without a pancake on his head).

151 posted on 12/12/2008 9:27:13 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
The misconception is that its standard protocol. It isn't. Most women who do IVF do not have multiple embryos. Many arrest before making it to the freezing stage. Those that are kept frozen and used later have a less than 50% chance of becoming viable.

This misconception is that every woman who does IVF has tons of eggs/embryos. And that is simply not true.

152 posted on 12/12/2008 9:27:23 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

I’m not out of arguments, I simply need no more. You are wrong and I have demonstrated it.


153 posted on 12/12/2008 9:27:52 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
And now as a n00b you would presume to order me around when your perfidy to the youngest humans is pointed out. typical

What's typical is your assumed moral superiority that allowed you to throw silly judgmental labels, instead of making good arguments. What's evident, by that, is that you not just lost; you were incapable of winning in the first place.

154 posted on 12/12/2008 9:28:36 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

The issues of LIFE ARE moral issues. Hadn’t you noticed?


155 posted on 12/12/2008 9:28:44 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
You are wrong and I have demonstrated it.

In la-la land, perhaps.

156 posted on 12/12/2008 9:29:28 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: rintense
I didn't see any mention of protocol, nor did I see any mention of tons. It happens.

Those that are kept frozen and used later have a less than 50% chance of becoming viable.

I wonder what the survival rate was at Auschwitz.

157 posted on 12/12/2008 9:29:53 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Life begins at the moment of contraception.

You mean 'conception', right?

158 posted on 12/12/2008 9:30:12 AM PST by NYer ("Run from places of sin as from a plague." - St. John Climacus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

I realize it is over your head, but, well, that’s the point: It’s over your head.


159 posted on 12/12/2008 9:30:36 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
The issues of LIFE ARE moral issues. Hadn’t you noticed?

So is the right to have biological progeny. Haven't you noticed? It's not merely a right- it's the driving force of all life on this planet. Ignore at your own peril.

160 posted on 12/12/2008 9:30:46 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: wombtotomb
before we adopted our youngest daughter my wife and I tried IVF....It failed....and I regret having gone through it....it still disturbs me knowing what I voluntarily allowed to happen....in hopes of having our "own" child...

I wholeheartedly recommend adoption....not just because of the blessings our daughter has brought our lives....but also to find peace in the decision....

I also recommend not putting off having children "until you are ready"....we waited and were very lucky with our first....
161 posted on 12/12/2008 9:30:56 AM PST by PigRigger (Donate to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org - The Troops have our front covered, let's guard their backs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: wombtotomb
That's crap. You go find me a reproductive clinic that implants six embryos and I'll believe you. Until then, you're a hysterical fool.

Oh, and you need a simple lesson in biology to understand how multiples occur. I'll give you an example: a friend of mine had IVF and two embryos transferred. One split and she has three children.

162 posted on 12/12/2008 9:31:57 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

“If science can improve the human condition, then yes.” Your demigod, ‘science’, can kill off a few hundred million humans and improve the conditions for the remainder. How telling that you would favor that, apparently! How revealing


163 posted on 12/12/2008 9:32:38 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
I realize it is over your head, but, well, that’s the point: It’s over your head.

Trust me, your arguments here, are available for all to see, and speak volumes about the feeble cause you intend to support.

164 posted on 12/12/2008 9:33:11 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

So an embryo arresting on its own is now comparable to Nazi Germany? Come on.


165 posted on 12/12/2008 9:34:13 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: NYer

No. I was making a joke.


166 posted on 12/12/2008 9:34:26 AM PST by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed.... so how could it be Redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Your demigod, ‘science’, can kill off a few hundred million humans and improve the conditions for the remainder.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Can you be more specific?

167 posted on 12/12/2008 9:34:27 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

Post 130.


168 posted on 12/12/2008 9:34:31 AM PST by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Post 130

Already addressed.

169 posted on 12/12/2008 9:35:55 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

We have many n00bs filthying up FR of late. That these pricks (littel nettles, nothing more) expect to be given credulity and lots of attention is an immediate giveaway. Twisting and deceit are the natural democrat way don’tchaknow. It is to smile, they are so obvious.


170 posted on 12/12/2008 9:36:20 AM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: PigRigger

Thank God for your eyes being open. God bless you for your selfless act of adoption. God smiled upon your family. Many do not realize that adoption IS Gods way of providing a child when one is prayed for in many instances. A child is a child. It matters not who made the clay, it is who shapes it.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for stepping up to the plate and knowing the difference between being a parent and father or mother only.


171 posted on 12/12/2008 9:36:50 AM PST by wombtotomb (since its "above his paygrade", why can't we err on the side of caution about when life begins?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: rintense

hysterical fool, i think not. No need for selective reduction if only 1 maybe 2 implanted. get an education before you spew bs. and you still do not address HOW MANY EMBRYOS ARE CREATED TO GET THE FITTEST TO IMPLANT AND THEN ARE DISCARDED,frozen, or used for research purposes. All are living babies. Good Day.


172 posted on 12/12/2008 9:41:15 AM PST by wombtotomb (since its "above his paygrade", why can't we err on the side of caution about when life begins?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: rintense
So an embryo arresting on its own is now comparable to Nazi Germany?

IVF takes a class of humans, defines away their humanity, and imprisons or destroys the members of that class in the service of whims of others.

173 posted on 12/12/2008 9:41:51 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: rintense
>>Some clinics recommend transferring more than 3 embryos if you are older than 35 or have had several unsuccessful IVF attempts. As you age your embryo quality can start to decline, therefore transferring more than 3 may give you a better chance of success. <<

From here...
http://www.ivfconnections.com/qtransfer.htm

I think that your idea of “common misconceptions” is your own. Practices in the UK are not too much different than here. It doesn't make sense that in the UK there are a million embryos to be killed but in the US, there aren't.

174 posted on 12/12/2008 9:42:34 AM PST by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
Trust me, your arguments here, are available for all to see, and speak volumes about the feeble cause you intend to support.

Feeble cause? Basic human rights for all humans?

175 posted on 12/12/2008 9:42:46 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Santayana was right.


176 posted on 12/12/2008 9:43:45 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
Plus, if I am right, then if you or any of your descendants willingly choose/s to cease to end their genetic lineage, then it ends up with you on the disadvantaged side. Cheers!

Not taking sides here......but what advantage do you gain when you, personally, no longer exist?

To your decedents it is obviously advatageous....but I don't see how it helps one personally after they are dead....the only advantages I see is when you are alive....
177 posted on 12/12/2008 9:44:08 AM PST by PigRigger (Donate to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org - The Troops have our front covered, let's guard their backs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: rintense

>>I’m 42 and on my 3rd IVF. I respond well (12+ follicles, near 100% retrieval/fert rates), make beautiful embryos, but they don’t implant. Three REs all say we have “implantation failure”. Specialist say the reason for this is either functional (ie, progesterone surging too early, akin to P27/cyclin E situation) to infectious in nature.

In IVF#1 we put in 6. In IVF#2 we put in another 6. We had 6 frozen embryos, 1 survived thaw and we put in 5. So 17 embryos in three transfers and not a single implantation. We did not do PGD so we opted to always put in more. We went with the assumption that at 41 (my age at retrieval) the odds are that 1 in 5 embryos are normal.<<

From here...
http://infertilityblog.blogspot.com/2006/11/how-many-embryos-are-you-putting-back.html


178 posted on 12/12/2008 9:45:58 AM PST by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
So is the right to have biological progeny.
If this statement is true, then the following must also be true:
1) As procreation is a right, then it exists without infringing on the rights of anyone else, correct? If you cannot reproduce without medical intervention, and cannot afford IVF, how will this "right" be provided? (In case it's unclear, I just proved that procreation is not a right.)
2) As procreation is a right, if you cannot reproduce without medical intervention because of issues with your partner, and cannot afford IVF, is rape justified? (In case it's not clear, I proved again that procreation is not a right.)

it's the driving force of all life on this planet.
What's your point? Survival of ones self, I submit, more primal than procreation. Is it a right that you have food at your table? If so, are you justified in killing innocents to obtain this food? Answer carefully.

179 posted on 12/12/2008 9:48:05 AM PST by BMiles2112
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: PigRigger
To your decedents it is obviously advatageous....but I don't see how it helps one personally after they are dead....the only advantages I see is when you are alive....

When you analyze deep enough, establishing a genetic legacy is the paramount motivation for all living forms, no matter how much PC nonsense can make arguments to the contrary. It's life's substitute for immortality.

180 posted on 12/12/2008 9:48:25 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
Feeble cause? Basic human rights for all humans?

No. Trying to prevent someone from reproducing. That's what you're fighting, by fighting IVF.

181 posted on 12/12/2008 9:50:12 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I am a committed Christian and am pro-IVF.

There is one sin associated with IVF, and it can be completely avoided. That sin is the destruction of leftover unused embryos.

There are 3 ways to avoid this sin of destroying leftover unused embryos: 1) donating to other infertile couples, 2) placing for adoption with snowflakes.org, or 3) using the embryos in subsequent IVF attempts until the embryos have all had the opportunity to implant.


182 posted on 12/12/2008 9:50:19 AM PST by olivia3boys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BMiles2112

The right to procreate is so basic, transcends all other rights. Genetic suicide is strongly disapproved, in all life-forms.


183 posted on 12/12/2008 9:51:46 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: rintense

Yes, I believe I read once that only 25% of IVF cycles result in any leftover embryos for freezing.


184 posted on 12/12/2008 9:53:13 AM PST by olivia3boys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade
I don't disagree with that. However, I'm not the one arguing for the supremacy of nature. Those arguing for IVF are claiming that propagation of genes is natural, and therefore good. I don't believe that something is good merely because it is so in nature.
185 posted on 12/12/2008 9:53:51 AM PST by thefrankbaum (Ad maiorem Dei gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

ethics in an unethical selfish world are totally complicated. Morality however is not. I will live by my morals because they are grounded in the good of society instead of self. Simply stated, what part of thou shall not kill is not ethical? It is easy to see it is immoral to kill a human being, no matter what stage of life it is at. Unethical “ethisits” argue it is ethical to kill some to create one, or heal one, or kill one who’s life is not deemed worth living. This is in complete disagreement with moral teaching. As Ronald Reagan once said, the only ones who argue for abortion are those who were not aborted. Same applies here.


186 posted on 12/12/2008 9:54:12 AM PST by wombtotomb (since its "above his paygrade", why can't we err on the side of caution about when life begins?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

ethics in an unethical selfish world are totally complicated. Morality however is not. I will live by my morals because they are grounded in the good of society instead of self. Simply stated, what part of thou shall not kill is not ethical? It is easy to see it is immoral to kill a human being, no matter what stage of life it is at. Unethical “ethisits” argue it is ethical to kill some to create one, or heal one, or kill one who’s life is not deemed worth living. This is in complete disagreement with moral teaching. As Ronald Reagan once said, the only ones who argue for abortion are those who were not aborted. Same applies here.


187 posted on 12/12/2008 9:54:12 AM PST by wombtotomb (since its "above his paygrade", why can't we err on the side of caution about when life begins?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
We have many n00bs filthying up FR of late. That these pricks (littel nettles, nothing more) expect to be given credulity and lots of attention is an immediate giveaway. Twisting and deceit are the natural democrat way don’tchaknow. It is to smile, they are so obvious.

I hope you're done taking out all your frustrations owing to your incapability to participate in the discussion, with that cute paragraph. It is plainly evident, what you intended to achieve with that nasty, LOL!

Background chatter, is all what that was.

188 posted on 12/12/2008 9:54:43 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

I’m not trying to prevent someone from reproducing, that’s a grotesque distortion of my position.

I’m trying to protect the basic human rights of ALL humans, not just the ones who survive the womb (or in this case, the glass dish).


189 posted on 12/12/2008 9:55:17 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: wombtotomb; olivia3boys
ethics in an unethical selfish world are totally complicated. Morality however is not. I will live by my morals because they are grounded in the good of society instead of self. Simply stated, what part of thou shall not kill is not ethical? It is easy to see it is immoral to kill a human being, no matter what stage of life it is at. Unethical “ethisits” argue it is ethical to kill some to create one, or heal one, or kill one who’s life is not deemed worth living. This is in complete disagreement with moral teaching. As Ronald Reagan once said, the only ones who argue for abortion are those who were not aborted. Same applies here.

Consult Olivia3boys argument.

190 posted on 12/12/2008 9:57:34 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Selective reduction is by no means a required part of the process of IVF.

Higher-order multiple pregnancies (more than twins) happens more often with IUI, not IVF, because with IVF the number of embryos replaced can be controlled—not so with IUI.


191 posted on 12/12/2008 9:57:42 AM PST by olivia3boys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
The right to procreate is so basic, transcends all other rights.

That is truly twisted.

The reality is that the individual's right to life is so basic, it transcends all others.

192 posted on 12/12/2008 9:58:00 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
I’m not trying to prevent someone from reproducing, that’s a grotesque distortion of my position.

In essence, respectively, yes you are; no it's not.

See #190

193 posted on 12/12/2008 9:59:17 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: olivia3boys
Don't pretend this is just about lives lost to selective reduction--a more monstrous euphemism I have not seen in quite some time.
194 posted on 12/12/2008 10:00:17 AM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
When you analyze deep enough, establishing a genetic legacy is the paramount motivation for all living forms,
False. If you were given the option of 1) A guarantee of a long, healthy life without genetic offspring (you would be free to adopt) or 2) A guarantee of procreation today with a second guarantee that the child would live a long life, but you will die tomorrow, which do you choose? Unless you can make the argument that only the disordered would choose a long life, then I'm afraid you're wrong.
195 posted on 12/12/2008 10:00:25 AM PST by BMiles2112
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
When you analyze deep enough, establishing a genetic legacy is the paramount motivation for all living forms, no matter how much PC nonsense can make arguments to the contrary. It's life's substitute for immortality.

Maybe that is what ultimately drives us to progriate....Yet...in the end it serves as no advantage when one dies....which is what I questioned initially....how does this provide an advantage to one who is dead....?

I cannot think of one advatage....assuming there is no existence after death....
196 posted on 12/12/2008 10:00:35 AM PST by PigRigger (Donate to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org - The Troops have our front covered, let's guard their backs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: olivia3boys
Yes, I believe I read once that only 25% of IVF cycles result in any leftover embryos for freezing.

This debate will go away as medical technology advances to the point where few, if any, extra embryos will be necessary.

197 posted on 12/12/2008 10:01:08 AM PST by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
That is truly twisted.

You are wilfully choosing to not see what's evident, in life.

Reproduction IS paramount, however twisted it may seem. In the long run, in strict terms, as a biological entity, the individual matters a mere fraction compared to its genetic legacy.

198 posted on 12/12/2008 10:01:37 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: olivia3boys

How about those million destroyed in the UK?

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1079


199 posted on 12/12/2008 10:01:46 AM PST by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: PigRigger
Maybe that is what ultimately drives us to progriate....Yet...in the end it serves as no advantage when one dies....which is what I questioned initially....how does this provide an advantage to one who is dead....?

Because nature values genetic legacy more than the individual.

200 posted on 12/12/2008 10:02:56 AM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 351-367 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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