Re: [asa] The unexpected burden of IVF

I dont know about infertility being a "sign". But I also think that your
question, which is a good one, does not need to even bring the issue of
animal adoption.

I think it is enough to say, there are many "unwanted" children that are in
need in the world. So why would a Christian just not be happy in saving
some of these unwanted children, instead of fertilizing one of their own?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christine Smith" <christine_mb_smith@yahoo.com>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] The unexpected burden of IVF

> Although I didn't have the time to read all of it,
> what I read was very interesting! Thanks for posting
> it!
>
> I want to present a question which is indirectly
> related to this topic--the question of whether or not
> IVF in and of itself is ethical from a Christian point
> of view (apart from the final destination of the
> unused embryos)? Here's my line of thought on this...
>
> I have volunteered with many animal rescue groups over
> the course of my life in order to save homeless pets
> from being killed at the pounds (FYI--in case you're
> not aware, that number is in the millions/year).
> Generally speaking, I consider the practice of
> breeders bringing yet more animals into the world to
> be wrong, because they only exasperate the problem of
> homeless pets, resulting in greater animal suffering
> and higher kill rates. I'm of the opinion that those
> who wish to adopt an animal should do so from a rescue
> group, pound, etc, so that those animals already
> living and in need may be cared for and loved.
>
> I use this as an illustration, not to equate animal
> life with human life (because they're not equal), nor
> do I wish to open up a debate about animal breeding;
> rather, my question is this: considering that there
> are thousands, perhaps millions of children waiting to
> be adopted, is it consistent with Christian ethics for
> parents to go out of their way to create biological
> offspring rather than open their homes to orphans or
> other children already in existence, that are in need?
> Is infertility perhaps a "sign" from God that His will
> is for parents to have children through adoption
> rather than the "natural" way?
>
> Though my own personal leanings are to favor such a
> view, I hesitate to think that this is a "Christian
> ethic" for all. Any thoughts?
>
> Christine
>
>
> --- drsyme@cablespeed.com wrote:
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> In looking up something for the "worthy response"
> thread. I came across this article.
>
> http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2006/07/souls_on_ice.html
>
> There are several interesting points in this article.
> First of all they estimate that there are 500,000
> embryos in cryo storage without any clear destination.
>
> Second, I am impressed with how much these parents
> struggle with the issue of these frozen embryos, and
> what to do with them. If there are so many people
> that think of these embryo's as human, that gives some
> weight to David O's view that because they are
> potentially people they are people. (And even though
> I find it interesting it is not enough to convince me
> that David's position is correct.)
>
> Third, I expect someone to mention Nazi medical
> experiments with this comment, but if the embryos are
> there, and they are just going to be destroyed, why
> shouldnt we use them for stem cell research, even if
> one thinks that they are fully human?
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
> with"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
> message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Sep 6 22:33:38 2007