IVF

Kiwi in IE

I am interested that IVF is legal here. It has been pointed out to me recently that the RCC believes that any unused, discarded embryos resulting from IVF procedures are on a par with abortion. Why are YD and the likes not howling, wailing and knashing their teeth with placards about baaaaaaaaaaaaaybeeees outside the Rotunda and other fertility centres if this is the case?

The reason it was kindly pointed out to me, is because OH and I have just recieved an appointment. Little Kiwi #2 is not proving easy to achieve and we are going down that route. Someone thought it would be helpful to explain the view of 'the Church', which as you can imagine is highly relevant and of great concern to me.

Anyway if the great, almighty RCC have as much problem with IVF as abortion, why is one legal in Ireland and not the other? (Not that I'm complaining, am very relieved that it is legal). I was previously aware that the RCC had issue with IVF, but as they have issue with everything to do with procreation, sexuality and fertility, I was never really interested enough to enquire into their irrational beliefs on the subject.

It seems very incongruent that although both abortion and unused IVF embryos are considered 'murdering babies' by RCC, there is a huge fuss from them about one, which they are managing, even in this day and age, to keep illegal, and barely a word from them about the other! I would expect under the circumstances to see religious pro lifers campaigning to criminalise IVF also.

Sierra 117

Youth Defence don't campaign against it for the same reason they don't campaign against the morning after pill or women being allowed to travel abroad for an abortion - because they know they would get no support.

[-0-]

Logic and religious behaviour don't always go hand in hand. :pac:

As Bill Hicks infamously said, the pro-lifers should lock hands outside cemeteries.

If it is gods will to naturally abort a fetus, then it is his will to allow people to engage in failed IVF treatment, surely?

Kiwi in IE

Sierra 117 wrote: »

Youth Defence don't campaign against it for the same reason they don't campaign against the morning after pill or women being allowed to travel abroad for an abortion - because they know they would get no support.

A bit incongruent are they not? Do they not think a baaaaaaaaaaaybeeeeeeee (blastocyst) that is 'murdered' in a fertility clinic is as important?

Kidchameleon

The Church don't make the laws in this country, the government do. That's why some things the church are against are legal, because its not up to them. If you have issues with things that are legal / illegal in Ireland, take it up with your local TD.

Kiwi in IE

Kidchameleon wrote: »

The Church don't make the laws in this country, the government do. That's why some things the church are against are legal, because its not up to them. If you have issues with things that are legal / illegal in Ireland, take it up with your local TD.

Do you not think that it is incongruent? Is the beliefs of 'The Church' not the reason abortion remains illegal here? Surely if abortion is illegal because 'Ireland is a Catholic country', and the doctrines of Catholicism spout the same view of IVF, then it would make sense for that to be illegal also. There is a large and vocal opposition to abortion, but barely a squeek about IVF.

Sarky

They have almost no public support for their anti-abortion asshattery. Something as obviously useful and positive as IVF would probably be the end of them if they had the guts to take a stand on it.

Kiwi in IE

Sarky wrote: »

They have almost no public support for their anti-abortion asshattery. Something as obviously useful and positive as IVF would probably be the end of them if they had the guts to take a stand on it.

Hence why I think they should be consistant and true to their convictions and begin to vehemently oppose it publicly.

lazygal

It annoys me when people who profess to be catholic see no problem with using treatments like IVF which is verboten according to the church. If even those who call themselves catholic can't be arsed respecting their beliefs why should anyone else?

[-0-]

lazygal wrote: »

It annoys me when people who profess to be catholic see no problem with using treatments like IVF which is verboten according to the church. If even those who call themselves catholic can't be arsed respecting their beliefs why should anyone else?

That's the thing, nobody in Ireland is really a catholic. Show me one person who waited until they were married to have sex because of their faith. The majority of "catholics" I know think the immaculate conception of Mary was her becoming pregnant with baby Jesus. Lots of Irish fail to believe the pope is infallible. Lots of Irish would like to see women priests, and like to see priests marry.

They are way more liberal than the Roman Catholic Church would have you believe. I would assert that most of them are agnostics.

Brian Shanahan

Kidchameleon wrote: »

The Church don't make the laws in this country, the government do. That's why some things the church are against are legal, because its not up to them. If you have issues with things that are legal / illegal in Ireland, take it up with your local TD.

We're not talking about the legality of the situation, but wondering why such groups as Hitler Jugend Defence who take the line "every sperm is sacred" aren't up in arms over the wasted "babies" (remember, they believe life begins at conception) "created, and then murdered" by IVF.

SmilingLurker

Firstly good luck with the IVF and Little Kiwi 2.

Most catholics don't even know what they are obliged to believe. Which is possibly why they still think themselves catholic. As for IVF, it is against the RCC teachings. I cannot think of any rational reason why it could be immoral when used to help couples. Sierra 117 is totally right, they would get no support at all trying to get it banned, which is why it is not a big thing.

Kidchameleon

Is it perhaps because IVF can lead to a life that otherwise may not have come to be? As opposed to abortion which in some cases is the opposite?*

* I'm not against abortion.

Morag

There was a challenge to the high court about embryo and Ivf, a couple had created the embryo and then broken up.
One party wanted them used to bring a child into the world and tried to used the 8th amendment to make it happen.
The ruling was that non implanted embryos were not considered to be 'unborn' and there for the 8th amendment did not apply.

Kiwi in IE

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Is it perhaps because IVF can lead to a life that otherwise may not have come to be? As opposed to abortion which in some cases is the opposite?*

* I'm not against abortion.

But is it right to murder 'babies' (blastocysts in Petrie dishes) in order to make one new life? If you apply the same arguments that the religious pro lifers apply to abortion then IVF should never be justifiable either. Strangely though it seems that it is because you hardly hear a word against it being available.

recedite

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Do you not think that it is incongruent? Is the beliefs of 'The Church' not the reason abortion remains illegal here? Surely if abortion is illegal because 'Ireland is a Catholic country', and the doctrines of Catholicism spout the same view of IVF, then it would make sense for that to be illegal also. There is a large and vocal opposition to abortion, but barely a squeek about IVF.

The reason is that abortion was "always" illegal here, just as it was in UK, USA and NZ. But while other countries liberalised their laws from the 1960's onwards, the influence of "the church" prevented any change here (until very recently, and even that change was the result of a novel supreme court interpretation, as opposed to a change by referendum).

The likes of IVF and also cloning and genetic engineering can progress before either the law, or the church, or the politicians have time to develop a position on them. So while the inertia of our politicians delays any liberalisation of the existing abortion laws, it can also allow for new techniques such as IVF to become commonplace. At that point it is too late for the church to campaign against them.
Also the traditional church position is in favour of women procreating, and against contraception. As long as the spare embryos are not destroyed, there should not be any specific theological problem in the short term. Its simply matter of freezing them, presumably for a future rainy day....

NamelessPhil

Actually I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that. If you really want to understand the full horror and tautological reasoning that permeates the Catholic Church read "Dignitas Personae" an instruction from 2008
From 1988 there is also "Donum Vitae" authored by the then Cardinal Ratzinger.

Kiwi in IE

NamelessPhil wrote: »

Actually I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that. If you really want to understand the full horror and tautological reasoning that permeates the Catholic Church read "Dignitas Personae" an instruction from 2008
From 1988 there is also "Donum Vitae" authored by the then Cardinal Ratzinger.

An extract from 'Donum Vitae';

Techniques of fertilization in vitro can open the way to other forms of biological and genetic manipulation of human embryos, such as attempts or plans for fertilization between human and animal gametes and the gestation of human embryos in the uterus of animals

Hahaha! Sound familiar anyone? Gay couples can't get married because the next step in the slippery slope will be that people might want to marry animals.

Is this their argument for every issue? Why do the RCC have a fixation on people wanting to have sex with, marry, and now procreate with animals? Bit weird isn't it?

And I was planning to ask the consultant at the Rotunda if I could have half human and half Dalmatian IVF instead. I like spots.

Is it just me or does this 'Magisterium' crap make anyone else laugh? It sounds like something from Harry Potter and only serves to make the RCC more difficult to take seriously (if that's possible after reading the above).

Sarky

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Is this their argument for every issue? Why do the RCC have a fixation on people wanting to have sex with, marry, and now procreate with animals? Bit weird isn't it?

I'm sure if you dig enough one will find that the hierarchy has indulged copiously in every sordid slippery slope fetish they've ever forbidden.

Bannasidhe? :pac:

Animord

I heard on the radio today (so it must be true) that one in seven couples in Ireland have trouble conceiving, which if true would wipe out a lot of the RC's customer base if they were to start being very vocal about it.

On a completely different note one of my grandparents was a doctor and he used to say if you ever wanted to hear absolute and utter filth listen to what comes out of the mouths of nuns and priests when they are coming round from an anaesthetic. :pac:

Kiwi in IE

Sarky wrote: »

I'm sure if you dig enough one will find that the hierarchy has indulged copiously in every sordid slippery slope fetish they've ever forbidden.

Bannasidhe? :pac:

I suspect it is a case of "he who doth protest too much" for sure. I wonder is there a private zoo in Vatican city?

Kiwi in IE

Animord wrote: »

I heard on the radio today (so it must be true) that one in seven couples in Ireland have trouble conceiving, which if true would wipe out a lot of the RC's customer base if they were to start being very vocal about it.

But the RCC are opposed to assisted conception. So one should then be right in supposing that the 90% of the population who call themselves Catholic would not consider such treatments?

lazygal

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

But the RCC are opposed to assisted conception. So one should then be right in supposing that the 90% of the population who call themselves Catholic would not consider such treatments?

I know couples who describe themselves as practicing Catholics who've had IVF. Napro is "approved" but didn't work so IVF was the next step. Hypocrisy? Well, yes, it is, but I don't know any "Catholic" who doesn't qualify their so called faith. So I don't see why I should respect catholic beliefs when even the so called catholics don't bother.

Animord

I know someone who is a practicing catholic and is doing IVF, she has told me that she is aware that she is going to hell and prays daily for forgiveness, but she wants a baby so badly that she doesn't care. Her priest knows all about it and doesn't seem to have been negative about it. Maybe he is just off-message.

But religion has always been like this. Eventually the RC Church will change its stance on the subject. (probably about 200 years, but they will)

Kiwi in IE

Animord wrote: »

I know someone who is a practicing catholic and is doing IVF, she has told me that she is aware that she is going to hell and prays daily for forgiveness, but she wants a baby so badly that she doesn't care. Her priest knows all about it and doesn't seem to have been negative about it. Maybe he is just off-message.

It is really sad that people think they are going to 'hell' for availing of modern technology to increase their chances of having a much wanted baby. I am very thankful that I was not indoctrinate with religion. Maybe I wouldn't have escaped its clutches and be thinking this way myself if I had been.

olkaie

I became pregnant for the first time in the hari unit icsi I am very pleased with the outcome of treatment

recedite

Well done
Now for the hard part....