|
|
Post by Mr. Daniel on Apr 9, 2013 15:56:50 GMT -5
Is it logically consistent to be against abortion but in favor of IVF?
|
|
rutha
New Member
Posts: 27
|
Post by rutha on Apr 10, 2013 17:07:31 GMT -5
Abortion and IVF kind of goes hand in hand so you can't approve of one and disapprove of one. The only do efferent between these two is the fact that in abortion, a woman is carrying the baby and in IVF it is artificially made. You end a life both ways; in abortion, the baby is cut out and killed and in IVF, the baby issue then destroyed for a research. Abortion and IVF both ends the life of a human not fully developed so if you are against abortion, then you should also be against IVF because you're fighting for the life of a human being and they both destroy that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Daniel on Apr 12, 2013 17:24:12 GMT -5
in IVF, the baby issue then destroyed for a research. To clarify: IVF does not necessarily destroy any embryos for research. For instance, I knew someone who did IVF. They had two embryos created. After having the fist embryo implanted and going through a pregnancy, they had the second embryo implanted to try to have a second child. In their case, there were no embryos destroyed or experimented on. How does that affect what you said in your first post, Ruth? |
|
|
|
Post by mconsidine on Apr 13, 2013 16:40:09 GMT -5
I agree with Ruth in saying that you cant approve of one and disapprove of another, but I think it depends on the circumstance. For example, in what you said, Mr Daniel, they did not destroy the embryo, but since multiple embryos can be created, some might be destroyed if they decide not to use them, which is similar to abortion because you are destroying a potential life. Since the embryo in the situation was not destroyed I think you can be in favor of IVF and against abortion. In the circumstance where someone decides to freeze an embryo and then destroys it because it is not needed, that is just like abortion because they both end the life of human like Ruth said. What do you think of freezing the embryo?
|
|
|
|
Post by betelihmk on Apr 13, 2013 17:50:48 GMT -5
Ruth I strongly disagree with you on the part where u said''...IVF and abortion are the same...'' they both are not the same. IVF tries to create an embryo unlike abortion which is destroying the embryo... as u said though the experiment can ended up on creating more than one embryos and that might cause to the act of freezing but remember the purpose of IVF is not to destroy an embryo... now days the technology is developing and doctors have improved drastically so i don't doubt the scientific errors would cause that many errors. There can be mistakes but maybe like less than 10%..
|
|
|
|
Post by betelihmk on Apr 13, 2013 20:23:14 GMT -5
Also I want to add another point to what I said earlier. If there is IVF there is always an egg or sperm cell donors. I personally think its okay to donate an egg cell to a woman who has been looking for a child her entire life but can't have one medically if u are going to loose it anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by karahumanski on Apr 14, 2013 9:54:31 GMT -5
Actually in IVF you dont always have some one donate a sperm or a egg but I do agree that it is okay to do so especcially for someone who is looking forward to having a baby and is for some reason on able to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by mconsidine on Apr 14, 2013 11:00:12 GMT -5
I agree with betelihmk on that point because if someone intended to do IVF because they couldn't have a baby any other way, it is different than abortion. However, I think that IVF should only be used by people who can't have a baby through sexual intercourse. If a couple does IVF just to create embryos for fun (not as a last resort) and ends up destroying extra embryos, then I think that is equivalent to abortion. It all depends on the circumstance though really.
|
|
|
|
Post by betelihmk on Apr 14, 2013 13:00:38 GMT -5
Kara IVF can be done in two ways. Homologous and Heterogonous. homologous is the only option that does not include a third person or donor. Heterogonous always involve a third party which is a donor.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisl on Apr 14, 2013 17:23:27 GMT -5
I believe someone can be logically consistent while being against abortion but in favor of IVF. As long as the embryo is not used for a purpose like lab testing where the know outcome is death for that embryo. If, as Mr. Daniels said earlier in the thread, the embryo is being implanted into someone solely for the purpose of having a child, there is no conflict in logic because there is only life for the embryo.
I agree with betelihmk when she says that abortion and IVF are different. The way I see it, abortion "helps" the parents in whatever situation they got themselves into by destroying life, whereas IVF "helps" the parents in the situation they are in by creating life for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by daniellev on Apr 14, 2013 17:42:22 GMT -5
I also agree with betelihmk on how IVF and abortion are not the same because the situations are completely different with IVF helping someone who cant have a baby as mconsidine said and abortion is killing the embryo which is someones life. With these points i believe it is possible to be against abortion and for IVF because they effect people differently. IVF and abortion are different concepts which is why you can be for one and not the other. If someone cant have a baby then IVF gives them the opportunity whereas in abortion, that person can have the baby and is choosing to end its life by destroying the embryo.
|
|
|
|
Post by amyb96 on Apr 14, 2013 18:17:40 GMT -5
I agree with betelihmk and chrisl. IVF and abortion are very different things; abortion ends a life, while IVF creates a life. Additionally, since IVF does not necessarily harm the embryos, it can be considered moral, while, in regards to abortion, since it does end a potential life, it could be considered immoral. Personally, I am pro-choice and for IVF, but if I was pro-life, my opinion of IVF would not change.
|
|
|
|
Post by erikpechnick on Apr 14, 2013 19:23:19 GMT -5
there are some points brought up that i agree with, but i find it hard to completely agree with any single answer because there is not one single answer to this question. since IVF isnt consistant in the sense that all the embryos can be used for a mother to have a child, but IVF can also create embryos that wont be used. if the IVF uses all the embryos for life, then yes, one can be against abortion and pro IVF. but the problm is, there is no way to tell if all the embryos are going to be used until after they are created. since there is this unknown in the use of IVF, the answer can easily be yes or no. until there is a 100% chance that all the embryos in IVF will be used for life, the answer can never be a solid yes in favor of IVF if a person is against abortion
|
|
|
|
Post by isabeller on Apr 14, 2013 19:26:59 GMT -5
I agree with Danielle how abortion and IVF are completely two different concepts. IVF is practically pro life since it creates babies from it and abortion is taking away that life. The church has a position that since IVF creates multiple embryos then when those embryos are discarded this is the equivalent to abortion. I feel that this is a far reach, because the embryo isn't even in the woman and even though it is not a good thing to discard of any embryo i think it is an overreach to say it's an abortion.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisl on Apr 14, 2013 21:29:37 GMT -5
I agree with amyb96 when she says that no matter whether I am pro choice or pro life, my views and opinions would not change about IVF.
I can not say the same thing about what erikpechnick is saying. I believe no matter how many embryos are not used during IVF, it is moral. If I am correct in saying the embryo is only a few cells during IVF, the embryo does not have a right to life. I could not tell anyone specifically when the exact point the embryo obtains the right to life because it is a grey area and no one knows for certain. However, because we are dealing with a an extreme, simply a fertilized egg, not a fully developed human, the other extreme, I think we can definitively say it has no rights because it is not developed at all.
|
|
