(August 10, 2015 at 4:13 pm)Pandæmonium Wrote:(August 10, 2015 at 10:42 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I wasn't trying to say you might not think life has any worth. I was trying to say exactly as it says, that you might not think life is sacred. Sacredness is very important here, otherwise, you are right, there should be no reason why IVF is immoral even if you believe human life has worth.
You may think it's a cop out, to you, but you need to understand that to us, sacredness is a HUGE deal. If you can't accept that, then it's impossible for you do understand where we are coming from, which is exactly what I said in that last sentence.
So therefore we're back to an abitary, undefined, opaque concept of 'sacred' which ultimately defines why one act of creating a zygote is 'immoral' and another act which for all intents and purposes is identical is not.
Still screams of a cop out to me. Nonsensical arbitrary labeling of something as immoral for no other reason than to save face. By the way, where is the actual condemnation of IVF in the bible? Or even artificial insemination?
You know what it reads like? It's as though research on IVF was published and the technique became widespread to assist couples who were having difficulty in conceiving, then some men in the Vatican sat around a table drinking some wine and it was suddenly brought up in conversation. "Oh, IVF? Erm, what is it, artificial insemination? Don't like the sound of that, better condemn it just in case!"
If the RCC suddenly came out and said it was ok (haven't read anything that suggests they haven't thus far) would you go along or stick to your guns?
I too would also like clarification on the question of vaccinations.
I don't expect you to agree with anything I say regarding sacredness. I understand that since you don't believe in God, it means nothing to you when I say "such and such is sacred." I said this on my post to you yesterday.
I have addressed the bible thing with Exian a couple pages back.
I have answered Alex's question and addressed the unnatural thing numerous times in this thread.
If that happened, I would lose all faith in Catholicism, since they claim that revealed moral truths don't change.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh