Skip to comments.Teacher Claims Catholic School Fired Her Over IVF
Posted on 04/26/2012 8:35:52 AM PDT by Abathar
FORT WAYNE, Ind. -- A Fort Wayne teacher who claims she was fired from a Roman Catholic school for using in vitro fertilization to try to get pregnant is suing in a case that could set up a legal showdown over reproductive and religious rights.
Emily Herx's lawsuit accuses the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend and St. Vincent de Paul School in Fort Wayne of discrimination for her firing last June.
Herx, 31, of Hoagland, Ind., said that the church pastor told her she was a "grave, immoral sinner" and that a scandal would erupt if anyone learned she had undergone in vitro fertilization, or IVF.
The Roman Catholic Church shuns IVF, which involves mixing egg and sperm in a laboratory dish and transferring a resulting embryo into the womb. Herx said she was fired despite exemplary performance reviews in her eight years as a language arts teacher.
Legal experts said Herx's case illustrates a murky area in the debate over separation of church and state that even the U.S. Supreme Court has failed to clearly address.
(Excerpt) Read more at theindychannel.com ...
That is truly as well as I have ever heard it put.
Most likely she wasn’t expecting them to have that attitude toward IVF. She probably told them not even expecting a reaction, they told her it’s a sin. She, in her 21st century “I want what I want when I want it” mentality told them she was going to do it anyway. They fired her.
She can’t believe it, and is now filling a lawsuit.
The process of IVF requires that a number of eggs be fertilized outside the womb. The hope is that one of the embryos (the fertilized eggs) will work. In the process, the other embryos are either frozen or destroyed.
Since life begins at conception, and conception is defined as the moment when fertilization occurs, it is just as morally wrong to destroy an embryo outside the womb as it is inside the womb.
In other words, the end result of IVF is exactly the same as an abortion.
The Church also teaches that the only way for conception to be valid is in the context of a sacramental marriage. The sex act must be open to conception, and have a unifying effect as well.
IVF lacks the unifying effect of the sexual act between a man and a woman.
Hope that helps.
Thanks. I appreciate that. And I do believe it sincerely.
But I did make a grammatical error.
I should have said “The Islamic religion is bloody...” or “Islam is bloody...”
(Not a big deal, I know. Just wanted to point it out.)
Or you could say, “Moslems are bloody,” but then one expects an adjective to follow the adverb “bloody.”
It’s a funny thing about our present intellectual culture (if one may call it that): a person can read a very intelligent, logically coherent, even eloquent explanation of a complex issue; an explanation that is accessible to natural reason as well as to religious belief ... and that person can dismiss the whole thing with the single word, “Personally ...”.
IVF babies risk major diseases
Polish Cardinal, Former Secretary to Pope JPII: Politicians, Like Pilate, Kill the Truth of the Life of the Unborn
Bishop criticizes reproductive technologys procreation without sex
Excommunication for deliberate embryo destruction?
Catholic School Teacher Fired for Having In Vitro
Vatican Summit Looks at Selecting Embryos
62-year-old Redding woman gives birth to 12th child
Actress Brooke Shields kills 140 of her very own Children by undergoing 7 IVF Treatments
Clinic Mix-Up Sparks Fears over IVF H
Well, I was trying to be polite, so fine.
That policy and the thought behind it is stupid. Makes me glad, yet again, that I’m not Catholic and beholden to such nonsense.
I love the way you addressed all the important points and showed why they were incorrect. It's typical of those who think killing unborn children is okay to simply say "stupid" and walk away, though.
So, they fired her for being guilty of murder for hire. Sounds like a valid reason to fire someone as far as I’m concerned.
Describing dead babies as nonsense does more to illuminate the hollowness of your soul than an autobiography would.
Or an adjective in front of “Moslems”.
“The process of IVF requires that a number of eggs be fertilized outside the womb. The hope is that one of the embryos (the fertilized eggs) will work. In the process, the other embryos are either frozen or destroyed.
“Since life begins at conception, and conception is defined as the moment when fertilization occurs, it is just as morally wrong to destroy an embryo outside the womb as it is inside the womb.
“In other words, the end result of IVF is exactly the same as an abortion.
“The Church also teaches that the only way for conception to be valid is in the context of a sacramental marriage. The sex act must be open to conception, and have a unifying effect as well.
“IVF lacks the unifying effect of the sexual act between a man and a woman.
“Hope that helps.”
Very well put. It’s sad that so many Roman Catholics and Protestants alike don’t understand this. I have some Southern Baptist friends who are very conservative and prolife but seem to have a cognitive dissonance when it comes to IVF.
That would work, too.
But, IVF does exactly the opposite, it enables life where the mother may, through no fault of her own, be unable to conceive. >>>
actually, it’s simple, first one needs to understand the ivf procedure and that life begins at conception. What the ivf procedure does is create many lives at one time in a petri dish, then some of those many lives are inserted into the woman knowing that most if not all those embryos will die. It’s a gamble. And if one or more live, then the option of selective reduction/abortion comes about. The remaining human life created in the petri dish will remain in a frozen gulag for life, frozen in liquid nitrogen. Either used to future use or to stay there for ever. There are over 400,000 babies in liquid nitrogen in England.
“Through no fault of her own” is a bit tenuous, too. In many cases, infertility is due to a history of contraception, abortion, and STDs. Then there are those who have no personal male participant, and those who are postmenopausal.
I also don't like them destroying fertilized eggs that the mother does not use.
No matter what you think of Octomom, she did carry all 8 to term and did use all eggs that were fertilized.
You are a rare gem in this increasingly angry, hostile forum.
Which part is stupid? Are things NOT what they are? Are humans not imbued with great dignity? Or is there part of the development that is stupid?
In what way does it resemble Christian Science? We think infertility is real and sad and we don’t think it can be cured by changing how one thinks.
We’re not anti-technology. But the whole idea of sin is that we CAN do stuff we shouldn’t do.