Peak Fertility For Women and Men

Blade Runner said:
The point is that it would be better overall as a policy if no one got it. The thinking that it is good because one random is decent and it helps him destroys sane social policy, whether we like it or not. It's also the same thinking women do, when they see Marth MaCallam on a news broadcast and let's say, she has 3 kids. I can do that too! lol
Click to expand...
@Samseau That's like saying no one should be allowed to use pain killers because some will abuse them.
Click to expand...
Sorry about the clunky formatting. I can't do direct quotes from the Men's Forum.

Anyway, I agree whole-heartedly with @Blade Runner here. The natural (God-made) process is completely removed. With IVF a "virgin" could bear a child. How is that not a mockery of Christ's divine conception? A man and a woman could have a child completely without copulation/intercourse... That is absolutely against what God says.

@Samseau That's like saying "abortion saves lives" in this context. IVF always involves some number of aborted lab inseminated "embryos." It is a horrible thing.
 
Get2choppaaa said:
The Church is pretty clear about being against this.
Click to expand...

The Church's position is exactly what I've stated. It's acceptable for medical procedures but immoral otherwise. Many medical procedures are not ethical in normal conditions but are when there are no other choices.

That said, I understand why some might feel revolted by IVF. However I think people have a mistaken impression of IVF. They think that embryo's thrown away have children in them, when in reality probably none of them would have conceived. The entire point of IVF is that women who have trouble conceiving have mostly bad eggs, and so IVF sorts through them quickly to find the few good remaining eggs.

This is why the Orthodox Church extends mercy to IVF for couples who have true difficulties conceiving, but it should only be used as a last resort due to it's inherent risks of accidently discarding a viable embryo.
 
Samseau said:
The Church's position is exactly what I've stated. It's acceptable for medical procedures but immoral otherwise. Many medical procedures are not ethical in normal conditions but are when there are no other choices.

That said, I understand why some might feel revolted by IVF. However I think people have a mistaken impression of IVF. They think that embryo's thrown away have children in them, when in reality probably none of them would have conceived. The entire point of IVF is that women who have trouble conceiving have mostly bad eggs, and so IVF sorts through them quickly to find the few good remaining eggs.

This is why the Orthodox Church extends mercy to IVF for couples who have true difficulties conceiving, but it should only be used as a last resort due to it's inherent risks of accidently discarding a viable embryo.
Click to expand...
Isn't this the position of the Orthodox church?
Morally inadmissible from the Orthodox point of view are also all kinds of extracorporal fertilisation involving the production, conservation and purposeful destruction of «spare» embryos. It is on the recognition of the human dignity even in an embryo that the moral assessment of abortion by the Church is based.
Click to expand...
source and source excerpt
 
starlight said:
Isn't this the position of the Orthodox church?

source and source excerpt
Click to expand...

Different parts of Orthodoxy will have different opinions, however, what you posted is generally correct. It is not dogma. Most Bishops would only permit IVF if one embryo is fertilized at a time, to see if it starts to develop, before being implemented. However, this is still risky and there is a chance of failure and death of the embryo, which is a sin, but again this is all pardonable if all other methods to conceive have been tried.

A mass fertilization of embryos will definitively be frowned upon. But using one egg at a time to see if it develops eliminates most risks, and is still much faster than waiting for one chance per month. For a woman who is rapidly approaching 45 or so, and has never had children, and has faithfully tried to have children until this point with her husband, I don't see why a Bishop would forbid such a medical procedure.

We live in a fallen world and medicine is God's salve to help us through it.
 
Samseau said:
We live in a fallen world and medicine is God's salve to help us through it.
Click to expand...
This counters in no way what you said previously.

My argument and stance still stand, as there is no reality in this world, especially in a secular nation, in which some proper arbiter is going to listen to what Samseau or anyone else has to say when anything is technically "legal." You are missing the mark big time on this one.

Samseau said:
For a woman who is rapidly approaching 45 or so, and has never had children, and has faithfully tried to have children until this point with her husband, I don't see why a Bishop would forbid such a medical procedure.
Click to expand...
 
Samseau said:
However I think people have a mistaken impression of IVF. They think that embryo's thrown away have children in them, when in reality probably none of them would have conceived.
Click to expand...


I thought all of them could potentially conceive, I only know what I hear form here and there in Christian media, they pick one they consider best based on different wishes and criteria.

I did hear from abortion proponents in the past that similar "natural" abortions happen all the time, I'd reply that an abortion means that a naturally viable pregnancy is terminated, and that those expelled by a woman's body from some early embryonic developmental complications didn't count, and we can't use them as justification. There are difficult pregnancies when doctors fight to save the baby.

A fertilized egg is already a new human life to me, that's when my life began and I want the government fighting on my side. I know of Catholic churchgoing couples who I'm almost totally sure have used IVF, but when I look at a child I can't help thinking- you have 4 dead siblings kid, another commenter wrote something similar earlier. Like in a creepy horror movie, several ghosts are attached to you.
 
It's been my understanding from friend in the Church which asked their priest about IVF, that the Priest has said the Church doesn't sanction it...and in fact recommended against.

Now if course, if people choose to do it, the Priest is going to ensure the innocent child is brought into the fold... If @Samseau that is what you're saying the we are probably aligned on the understanding...
 
Samseau said:
Different parts of Orthodoxy will have different opinions, however, what you posted is generally correct. It is not dogma. Most Bishops would only permit IVF if one embryo is fertilized at a time, to see if it starts to develop, before being implemented. However, this is still risky and there is a chance of failure and death of the embryo, which is a sin, but again this is all pardonable if all other methods to conceive have been tried.

A mass fertilization of embryos will definitively be frowned upon. But using one egg at a time to see if it develops eliminates most risks, and is still much faster than waiting for one chance per month. For a woman who is rapidly approaching 45 or so, and has never had children, and has faithfully tried to have children until this point with her husband, I don't see why a Bishop would forbid such a medical procedure.

We live in a fallen world and medicine is God's salve to help us through it.
Click to expand...
Further from the source previously quoted:
Therefore, the Church cannot regard as morally justified the ways to childbirth disagreeable with the design of the Creator of life. If a husband or a wife is sterile and the therapeutic and surgical methods of infertility treatment do not help the spouses, they should humbly accept childlessness as a special calling in life. In these cases, pastoral counsel should consider the adoption of a child by the spouses' mutual consent. Among the admissible means of medical aid may be an artificial insemination by the husband's germ cells, since it does not violate the integrity of the marital union and does not differ basically from the natural conception and takes place in the context of marital relations.
Click to expand...
"...does not differ basically from the natural conception and takes place in the context of marital relations." That is not IVF.
 
starlight said:
"...does not differ basically from the natural conception and takes place in the context of marital relations." That is not IVF.
Click to expand...

How is that not IVF? As long as one egg is fertilized at a time (as opposed to mass fertilization) then it's exactly what the article claims.
 
Samseau said:
How is that not IVF? As long as one egg is fertilized at a time (as opposed to mass fertilization) then it's exactly what the article claims.
Click to expand...
I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse lol

Natural conception: fertilization happens in the womb

Marital relations: sexual intercourse between a husband and wife

IVF doesn't fulfill either of those and is not artificial insemination which is a different process that (if done properly) still fulfills both natural conception and marital relations.

Edit: Just to add, that I certainly empathize with the hypothetical 45 year old woman trying to conceive and can understand how IVF could be a great temptation but the end doesn't justify the means here.

Mark 8:36
For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?
 
Last edited:
I guess I don't see the difference between inseminating an egg in the womb vs. an egg in a test tube. Both are artificial. I thought that's what these articles are referring to.
 
RedLagoon said:
@Blade Runner

I thought you might "like" this... not for everyone.

Edit; there are some interesting things brought up.


Click to expand...

What's your take? A commenter called Daniel said this:

Sadia is dangerous. She says a couple gems and speaks very confidently but really doesn't know what she is talking about at least half the time. The way she makes such absolute statements about men or women in general is frankly insane and you can see it on Orion's face throughout the conversation. She's stuck in a vain feedback loop. She can't even let the other guest talk without making it about her with her performative sounds and wide-ranging interruptions
Click to expand...

Interesting take.

She also has a take that men who use escorts want the approval of a woman. Hmm, never heard that one.

Most of the commenters are questioning why she has such a big online following, basically.
 
Samseau said:
The Church's position is exactly what I've stated. It's acceptable for medical procedures but immoral otherwise. Many medical procedures are not ethical in normal conditions but are when there are no other choices.

That said, I understand why some might feel revolted by IVF. However I think people have a mistaken impression of IVF. They think that embryo's thrown away have children in them, when in reality probably none of them would have conceived. The entire point of IVF is that women who have trouble conceiving have mostly bad eggs, and so IVF sorts through them quickly to find the few good remaining eggs.

This is why the Orthodox Church extends mercy to IVF for couples who have true difficulties conceiving, but it should only be used as a last resort due to it's inherent risks of accidently discarding a viable embryo.
Click to expand...
The problem with IVF is that it encourages women to marry old and have children at an old age. Which is unhealthy for the children but also bad for the man and society at large. The church should be completely against IVF as the majority of IVF is occurring due to the woman being old and in the rare cases its not perhaps that family can adopt children or the man can impregnate another woman with the man's wife becoming the adopted mother. We should look to how societies in ancient times dealt with barren women. The options were usually either divorce, adoption or the husband impregnating another woman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top