atheism and children

[Fidel_Castronaut]

That may be because it wasn't an analogy to show an objection to IVF, per se. You have to remember where that analogy originated from. Someone said they don't understand what the problem is with IVF if the end result is the same as having sex - you have a kid.

My analogy was simply to show that there can be a right and wrong way of going about the same end result.

That's all that was.

I have several times now given my reasons as for why I think IVF is wrong, so I don't think it's fair for you to say that I have not. I will try to look for one of them and repost it.

Here was the first time I addressed it:

The short answer is this:

We believe reproduction is a very sacred act. And as all things sacred, we believe it should be guarded and protected and kept in the purity of its natural form. We think if a couple can't conceive, the more moral thing would be to adopt and give a home to one of the many homeless children of the world.

I later, in multiple other posts, added to this by saying that by "reproduction" we mean the actual conception... the actual joining of egg and sperm, which is the fixed point when a new human life begins.

Since we think human life is sacred, and thus the creation of human life is sacred, we believe it should remain guarded and protected in the confines of sexual intercourse. Remember, we also think sex is sacred. As is marriage, and as is the love between husband and wife. We think something as sacred as human life should come from a place that is equally as sacred - the lovemaking between husband and wife, where a human being can come into this world through love, literally.

We don't think masturbating into a jar and then having a stranger join sperm and egg together on a petri dish in a medical office, is the proper context for such a sacred thing as the beginning of new human life to take place.

Of course, none of this can even begin to make sense to you if you don't think human life is sacred, if you don't think sex is sacred, and if you don't think the love between husband and wife and marriage is sacred lol. But we do. So you have to see it through our lenses if you're genuinely trying to understand where we are coming from.

I was with you in understanding your reasons *why* until this last sentence/paragraph.

This use of an ambiguous word, 'sacred' doesn't sit well with me, and also it seems as though you accuse me (and by extension others) of not finding an inherent 'worth' in human life/life per se should we not ascribe to this undefined notion of sacredness. This is false and not a description which could be aimed at me with any reasonable certainty of it being true.

If we're talking 'sacred' in a spiritual/religious way, then certainly I would agree that there is nothing sacred about us or indeed anything in the Universe. However, if we are talking in terms of *worth*, then you'll find that I agree very much about the worth of life, not just human life but all life.

Indeed, talking in terms of worth, this actually makes your position the more ambiguous and dismissive. Because a couple may not be able to create a child through traditional sexual intercourse, the above description seems to suggest that any other form of conception thus has less validity/worth. When I ask as to your actual reasons *why* you disagree, and when I state that you have still not given a good reasons as to *why*, it is here I am focusing my critique. 'Because it's sacred' reads 'Because cop-out'. Again, a couple who has IVF treatment still make love, they still have sperm and egg, but for one reason or another there is no creation of a zygote. Joining them in dish and then inserting them into the womb is effectively the exact same thing. There is still love between the couple (one would presume as given), they still have intercourse, there is still *love* for the entire process and the result.

Your rejection of this for couples who receive IVF is, for lack of a better word or description, perplexing and unfounded. You have absolutely no authority to suggest that conception through IVF is any less valid in terms of worth (let alone love) when compared to a couple who are lucky enough to be able to conceive through conventional means. Your insinuation that a couple that have to resort to IVF to conceive has less *worth* or *love* is not welcome, and certainly should be met with the fiercest criticism.

Your above post is effectively an apology of bigotry and a way of squaring the circle in order for the RCC to save face when confronted with ambiguity.