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 ...
Again, the standard embryo transfer is two, three if the woman’s age is over 37 and has poor embryo quality. I challenge you to find a reproductive clinic that publicly states they’ll transfer over 4.
The natural right of an individual to reproduce, that you want to oppose, is what's fascism.
And at the level that this specific right applies, the rights of the individual are a noble, but not naturally existing, rights. It needs a healthy society and active effort to preserve. The maintenance of the right to reproduce, on the other hand, manages to survive without those. That's the law of life. Yours are the law of man.
The arguments are not fascism vs. liberalism. The arguments are regarding the nature of life, and our place in the system that supports life, as a whole.
So the first time you said, “None over three”
Now it’s “None over four.”
I already gave references.
I believe at this point U.S. fertility clinics are very unregulated.
I don’t think there are any legal limits in the U.S. on how many embryos they can transfer.
Many reproductive endocrinologists have their own clinic policies they adhere to though. They don’t want to see higher-order multiples result any more than the parents do.
Yes, when I said ‘you,’ I was not referring to that individual ‘you’ alone. I was referring to all the genetics’ that lead to that ‘you,’ and the inherent, intrinsic nature of the system that lead to the ‘you’ to continue the legacy of the ‘you’ and its ancestors, in the best way the ‘you’ can.
Confusing?
Fine, three. And no, you gave a woman’s account. You didn’t give the clinic.
Sadly, nature would reward the individual that ensures that balance, IF it comes down to that. That's the rule of life.
I agree with you that it is sinful to destroy a frozen embryo, whether it is the clinic’s decision or the parents’ decision to do so.
I’m just saying that doesn’t make IVF itself sinful.
I gave a reference to IVF Connections
http://www.ivfconnections.com/qtransfer.htm
This is a reference board for more than “one woman”
You have not given a single reference/link.
>>I’m just saying that doesn’t make IVF itself sinful.<<
Understanding that at some point a baby will be killed, by parent or clinic, IMO it is.
To put it shortly, as far as nature is concerned, you are your genes. That is the only part that you will have, that has a chance at perpetual existence, in one form or another, as it relates to physical reality. Everything else, will be forgotten. Of course, if a god / God exists, all that changes. So far, I'm skeptical regarding the latter.
This is the first site I found:
“Appropriate patients are offered IVF, after some initial testing such as a sperm count, a few hormone tests and an evaluation of the uterine cavity to establish the cause of infertility. The first stage involves stimulating the woman’s ovaries so that several eggs mature. Normally, a woman produces one egg in each menstrual cycle, but with IVF, many ovarian follicles are produced by hormone stimulation and several eggs are obtained (usually 7-15) and a number of embryos are produced after oocyte fertilization. Two or three embryos are replaced into the woman’s uterus to increase the chance of getting pregnant the first time...However, one of the most important things to remember about IVF is that it only works about half the time in the best couples. So sometimes the patient needs to repeat the cycle.”
http://centerforhumanreprod.com/ivf.html?gclid=CL6elorau5cCFSJIagod1BNvRw
It is sinful if one is Catholic.
Well, I’m truly puzzled why you think it’s funny or sad that I’m a pro-IVF Christian.
I know a lot about IVF and I know a lot about Christianity.
Here’s an analogy: saying IVF is sinful because some IVFers choose to destroy leftover embryos is like saying alcohol is sinful because some choose to drink too much and subsequently end up in a whole host of sins.
I think IVF per se is not sinful in the same way I think alcohol per se is not sinful. But in both cases, Christians should be very careful with both.
You did not answer the question. A mistake, no doubt. Here the are again: Which would YOU choose? Second, are those who would choose the first option wrong in their choice?
There is absolutely no need to kill anything with IVF. Ever. The whole point of IVF is to make life.
There's something kind of neat they did downtown, I hate to admit...last summer the four way stop at the intersection of Michigan Ave and Washington Square was replaced with a roundabout. I hate those damn things and I avoid them like the plague. Well, I took a visiting niece nighttime sightseeing after Thanksgiving, and we found ourselves downtown...in the island of the traffic circle, there is a nice Christmas tableau (okay, not Christmas, but still very pretty). Nutcracker standing with wrapped gifts. What's nice is that it's in line with the Capitol and state Christmas tree. You can pose for pictures in the island and get quite a nifty shot. I have a pic of it up on my facebook page, and I'm going to take all three boys back for more picture fun tonight. Whether they want to or not.
So what became of bigotroll?
>> the so-called “morning after pill” and the drug RU-486,
This is not what many think of as “the pill” (contraception) which is mentioned the title.
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.