Author Topic: Why the Catholic Church is against In Vitro Fertilization (Read 1919 times)

Matthew · « **on:** June 16, 2009, 11:17:36 AM »

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health/2009/06/16/saville.uk.ivf.mistake.itn

kittycat496 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 16, 2009, 12:05:26 PM »

The Catholic Church is against IVF because sometimes lab techs aren't good at their jobs? That doesn't make sense? A bad lab tech can mix up lots of things. They can mix up test results and blood typing. That doesn't mean that Catholic Church is against transfusions and AIDS screening. This was plain and simple a horrible accident and a tech that needs to lose their job. The procedure works if the right people get the right stuff.

clare · « **Reply #2 on:** June 16, 2009, 12:50:09 PM »

Quote from: kittycat496

The Catholic Church is against IVF because sometimes lab techs aren't good at their jobs? That doesn't make sense?

No, that is not the reason the Church opposes IVF. It is because the pro-creative and unitive should not be separated.

There is only one moral way to get a baby into a lady's tummy. No other way is acceptable, even if no mistakes happened.

trent13 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 16, 2009, 01:42:51 PM »

aren't they risking aborting fetuses too given that they have to make sure a whole batch of eggs are fertilized before putting in only a couple?

Matthew · « **Reply #4 on:** June 16, 2009, 01:50:53 PM »

And how do they get the sperm?

There are a whole host of problems with IVF.

There are countless reasons why the Church forbids it.

Matthew

kittycat496 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 16, 2009, 03:31:39 PM »

But, this whole to topic said that this was the reason we shouldn't use IVF. It then told a story about a lab mix up. So the reason the church is against it is because of the issue of taking apart *hm hm hm* and conception.

Actually the whole thing about abortion really isn't and issue with IVF. In IVF they get any where from 2-15 eggs. The take the top ones from these eggs and fertilize. That usually lands with an average of 8 contestants. You throw out the ones that don't appear to be in good working order and with any luck that gives you 4 to 6 to place back inside the women. Then if your lucky 1 or 2 implant. You see the ones being thrown out are being thrown out because they are non-viable. IVF isn't the nicest of procedures on the poor old egg and *cough*. You are basically cutting it up and shoving it together by hand. So obviously your going to end up with a couple that just don't work out. They don't throw away viables, if there are viable extra's there saved for future use. So no babies actually killed, non-viables usually just never got going in the first place.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #6 on:** June 16, 2009, 03:57:16 PM »

Quote from: kittycat496

But, this whole to topic said that this was the reason we shouldn't use IVF. It then told a story about a lab mix up. So the reason the church is against it is because of the issue of taking apart *hm hm hm* and conception.

Yes, he should have done a better job at naming this topic. I'd imagine he was aiming for something that would get clicked on.

Quote from: kittycat496

Actually the whole thing about abortion really isn't and issue with IVF. In IVF they get any where from 2-15 eggs. The take the top ones from these eggs and fertilize. That usually lands with an average of 8 contestants. You throw out the ones that don't appear to be in good working order and with any luck that gives you 4 to 6 to place back inside the women. Then if your lucky 1 or 2 implant. You see the ones being thrown out are being thrown out because they are non-viable. IVF isn't the nicest of procedures on the poor old egg and *cough*. You are basically cutting it up and shoving it together by hand. So obviously your going to end up with a couple that just don't work out. They don't throw away viables, if there are viable extra's there saved for future use. So no babies actually killed, non-viables usually just never got going in the first place.

Even if you go through all of that and find everything to be acceptable in terms of abortion, there's still the fact that most of those "saved for future use" won't ever be used. I'm sure they're tossed at some point.

clare · « **Reply #7 on:** June 16, 2009, 04:02:43 PM »

Quote from: kittycat496

But, this whole to topic said that this was the reason we shouldn't use IVF. It then told a story about a lab mix up. So the reason the church is against it is because of the issue of taking apart *hm hm hm* and conception.

Yes, that and, as Chant alluded to, the act needed to obtain the father's gametes.

kittycat496 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 17, 2009, 07:44:59 AM »

Yes, they are tossed generally about 6 years or so after when they are no longer viable. The whole point is when they are tossed, they are tossed because there is no way they could ever create a living baby.

Yes they require that the man take things into his own hands, but wouldn't this be different? He's not doing it out of selfish pleasure or anything like that. It is done with the sole purpose of trying to get his wife pregnant. It's not frustrating the purpose of having those bits. The main difference is this time he has to do it himself because the baby get's mixed in a dish rather then a woman.

clare · « **Reply #9 on:** June 17, 2009, 08:58:51 AM »

Quote from: kittycat496

Yes, they are tossed generally about 6 years or so after when they are no longer viable. The whole point is when they are tossed, they are tossed because there is no way they could ever create a living baby.

Lots of souls consigned to Limbo, there.

Quote

Yes they require that the man take things into his own hands, but wouldn't this be different? He's not doing it out of selfish pleasure or anything like that.

No. The end does not justify the means. It is not permissible to do evil that good may come of it.

Quote

It is done with the sole purpose of trying to get his wife pregnant. It's not frustrating the purpose of having those bits. The main difference is this time he has to do it himself because the baby get's mixed in a dish rather then a woman.

And the baby is meant to be mixed in the woman, remember?