The Vatican and IVF

[orcprocess]

The Vatican on Friday spelled out Roman Catholic moral teaching on a wide variety of scientific and medical procedures dealing with human reproduction. Catholic teaching on bioethics is based on the principle of unconditional respect for human life from conception to natural death and for the transmission of such life through sexual intercourse by married couples only.

The document therefore condemned virtually all forms of artificial fertilisation and genetic engineering and urged Catholics to oppose them in almost all cases.

The document declared the following procedures morally unacceptable:

-- in vitro fertilisation.

-- research in and use of embryonic stem cells.

-- post-fertilisation birth control methods such as morning after pills, the so-called abortion pill RU-486 (mifepristone) and the inter-uterine device (IUD).

-- surrogate motherhood.

-- human cloning, both reproductive and therapeutic.

-- hybrid cloning using animal oocytes (immature female germ cells) to reprogram the nuclei of human somatic cells.

-- freezing embryos or oocytes for use in artificial fertilisation.

-- pre-implantation diagnosis of embryos to avoid genetic defects or select for gender or other qualities.

-- reduction of implanted embryos to prevent multiple births.

-- intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) to overcome male fertility problems.

-- germ line cell therapy to modify genes transmitted to offspring.

-- genetic enhancement for purposes other than medical treatment.

-- use of human biological material of illicit origin, such as experimentation on human embryos.


The document declared the following procedures morally acceptable:

-- promotion of natural fertility including hormone treatment and surgery for endometriosis or obstructed fallopian tubes.

-- use of stem cells obtained from adult organisms, umbilical cord blood or foetuses dead by natural causes.

-- research into the prevention of sterility.

-- somatic gene cell therapy for strictly therapeutic purposes in an individual patient.

The full thing (dignitas personae) is here:
http://www.usccb.org/comm/Dignitaspersonae/Dignitas_Personae.pdf

[Patriot 167]

No disagreement with those.

[orcprocess]

Their opposition to IVF is not new, of course. A 2003 article spelled out that:

Pope Paul VI has taught that there is an "inseparable connection, willed by God, and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning."

IVF violates the rights of the child: it deprives him of his filial relationship with his parental origins and can hinder the maturing of his personality. It objectively deprives conjugal fruitfulness of its unity and integrity, it brings
about and manifests a rupture between genetic parenthood, gestational parenthood, and responsibility for upbringing. This threat to the unity and stability of the family is a source of dissension, disorder, and injustice in the whole of social life.

http://www.catholicinsight.com/online/church/vatican/article_475.shtml

[Marcus89]

Yet more proof that the Catholic church is still sat in the dark ages, it also adds to the list of why we are better off without the Catholic church's influence.

[Paul]

Yet more proof that the Catholic church is still sat in the dark ages, it also adds to the list of why we are better off without the Catholic church's influence.

We still need something to prevent science rushing toward our destruction, to prevent something like the atomic bomb.

[Marcus89]

We still need something to prevent science rushing toward our destruction, to prevent something like the atomic bomb.

Yeah, however not from something that cannot prove it's existance, and something that has already stood in the way of progress to satisfy it's own dogmatic and somewhat indoctrinated, out-dated and archaic views.

[Photosaurusrex]

The catholic church are all for families and marriage etc, BUT if a married couple cant have children and have IVF to get children its unnacceptable?

I don't see how, what do they not like about artificial fertilisation?

[Marcus89]

I don't see how, what do they not like about artificial fertilisation?

Because the Catholic church sees it as immoral. However they fail to grasp the concept that if help is available, any strong couple who want children should be given that help.

I've asked Catholics this before and they cannot rubuttle it, so I'll ask the same question to the forum;

How do we know, that God isn't acting through scientists to allow such amazing scientific breakthrough?

[cig1705]

The catholic church are all for families and marriage etc, BUT if a married couple cant have children and have IVF to get children its unnacceptable?

If memory serves the Church encourages infertile couples to adopt rather than to use artificial means to acquire children: it sees offspring as a "blessing" rather than a "right" and if people can't have children then they have to accept that and compensate for it in other ways...

[Marcus89]

if people can't have children then they have to accept that and compensate for it in other ways...

Not when we have methods of artifical inseminations. The church needs to be dragged out of the dark ages and accept alternative scientific methods. If the Catholic church wishes to cling onto it's archaic views, let it. Thankfully, we don't have to share the same narrow minded view.

[Tom Follett]

We still need something to prevent science rushing toward our destruction, to prevent something like the atomic bomb.

yeah, we really need something based on entirely unprovable sources administered by a select few. The church didn't stop nuclear war, but the SALT treaties did.

[make.me.smile]

In general, I don't believe the church should have the right to tell their followers that artificial insemination etc is wrong.
But on a personal level I'm leaning towards saying that they seem to be headed in the right direction. I know how hard it can be for people who cannot have their own kids. But I do think that adoption is an incredible opportunity.
And I think it is right that there is someone out there who is ready to be controversial and to say that scientists should stop "playing God".

[Tom Follett]

In general, I don't believe the church should have the right to tell their followers that artificial insemination etc is wrong.
But on a personal level I'm leaning towards saying that they seem to be headed in the right direction. I know how hard it can be for people who cannot have their own kids. But I do think that adoption is an incredible opportunity.
And I think it is right that there is someone out there who is ready to be controversial and to say that scientists should stop "playing God".

how about the church stops 'playing god'?

[make.me.smile]

I don't really know what to say to that.

But I think that both science and religion benefit us all in different ways. It's a person's choice which they want to follow. I just think that maybe we need some of the church's traditional values back, that's all.

[Marcus89]

I don't really know what to say to that.

But I think that both science and religion benefit us all in different ways. It's a person's choice which they want to follow. I just think that maybe we need some of the church's traditional values back, that's all.

Values such as respect for one another, the idea behind a loving and caring family, providing oppotunity for people. Not out-date views that should no longer serve purpose in aspects of human life.

[orcprocess]

Values such as respect for one another, the idea behind a loving and caring family, providing oppotunity for people. Not out-date views that should no longer serve purpose in aspects of human life.

It is entirely up to Catholic church to decide what they think is revelent to mordern society and what is out-dated.

[make.me.smile]

We clearly disagee on whether this particular view is in fact outdated.

[Tom Follett]

I don't really know what to say to that.

But I think that both science and religion benefit us all in different ways. It's a person's choice which they want to follow. I just think that maybe we need some of the church's traditional values back, that's all.

When we talk about 'traditional values' it always sounds nice, but what do we mean by that? much of organised religions' line over the centuries has been intolerance towards people of a different background or religion, repression of women, hatred of gays and an obsession with maintaining their dominance of thinking.. I don't think the 'traditional values' are something we should really miss.

[orcprocess]

When we talk about 'traditional values' it always sounds nice, but what do we mean by that? much of organised religions' line over the centuries has been intolerance towards people of a different background or religion, repression of women, hatred of gays and an obsession with maintaining their dominance of thinking.. I don't think the 'traditional values' are something we should really miss.

Well it depends on which values doesn't it. For example intorelance to homosexuals is a thing that is out-dated but a loving family is not out-dated and entirely revelent towards modern society. Most things in the middle are one's opinion as to whether they are out-dated or useful and relevent

[make.me.smile]

Religion grow and changes. But it manages to keep up some very important values. I agree with these values, and I think that all of you do, though you may not like to admit it because you associate it with the church, and religion, and there's a lot of bad there, too.

[orcprocess]

Religion grow and changes. But it manages to keep up some very important values. I agree with these values, and I think that all of you do, though you may not like to admit it because you associate it with the church, and religion, and there's a lot of bad there, too.

Some of the policies of the Catholic church I totally agree with but others I don't agree with.

[Marcus89]

It is entirely up to Catholic church to decide what they think is revelent to mordern society and what is out-dated.

That is an extremely moot point.

[Paul]

Thankfully, we don't have to share the same narrow minded view.

I think you are being narrow minded by suggesting that a couple's children should come from themselves [even though IVF is hard to do successfully, safely, and often fails] when there are thousands waiting to be adopted. Both processes would probably be as long and tenuous as each other anyway.

[Marcus89]

I think you are being narrow minded by suggesting that a couple's children should come from themselves [even though IVF is hard to do successfully, safely, and often fails] when there are thousands waiting to be adopted. Both processes would probably be as long and tenuous as each other anyway.

It was actually an attack on the idea that couple's should have to accept that they can't have children for one reason or the other.

[Paul]

It was actually an attack on the idea that couple's should have to accept that they can't have children for one reason or the other.

Well, acceptance is amazingly important.

[Marcus89]

Well, acceptance is amazingly important.

Never said it wasn't, but in this day and age where modern science is moving forward at the pace it is, acceptance is not the end of the line.

We don't accept that those with cancer have their days number, we have poured hundreds of billions, if not trillions to cancer research.

We don't accept that those with AIDS have to 1) suffer to the end of their days 2) die as a result of AIDS. We pour funding into research to combat the virus.

We have created vaccines from small pox, TB, measles, mumps, polio and countless other viruses.

If couples wish to take part in IVF to have children, they should be able to. If it's[Catholism] followers wish to accept that as God's will, fine by me. Thankfully, the rest of us aren't influenced by it.

[soph41190]

Well, acceptance is amazingly important.

On what grounds? God's purpose?

We went to the moon because we could not 'accept'.
We made the television,
we made the car,
we make buildings that are taller and taller than the last,
part of being human is 'not' accepting our boundaries, and being open minded enough to want to reach out and explore.
Organised religion yearns to keep its members in the dark, it is control. 'Acceptance' is therefore, to such people, important.