atheism and children

[Fidel_Castronaut]

No, as it happens, I can't.

The end result is exactly the same whether it's through actual intercourse or insertion of the fertilised eggs into the womb.

The difference is entirely arbitrary and moral objections to IVF appear to be an objection for objection's sake of to save face in the light of ambiguity of dogma and/or doctrine When confronted with technological advance.

Hell just have sex before/after the procedure and pretend. The procedure at least has a guaranteed % chance of starting the process (in that the sperm has met the egg) 'Normal' intercourse is hit and miss *at best*.

It's not the end result that we think is immoral, it's the act itself.

If you need $10 you can either attain it by stealing, or by shoveling snow off your neighbor's driveway. The end result is the same... you got $10.

Likewise, it's not having a kid that we think is immoral (obviously lol), it's the means by which you went about it.

That is the most ridiculous analogy I've ever read regarding an objection to IVF.

If you disagree with the means, fair enough. However, to date, you have failed consistently to provide a valid or even comprehensible reason to this general membership as to why you hold this objection. "Because reasons" is all I can deduce at the moment.

I can only conclude back to my original conclusions regarding the knee-jerk to 'It's sinful (or whatever)' when confronted with an ambiguity following on from technological advance.