A question for the pro-life members of MN

[SemperIdem]

The biggest argument always boils down to “taking a life away, acting like God”.

So - how does IVF sit with you? Are you anti it, because it is “acting like God”. Are you for it because acting like God to create a life is somehow fine whereas taking one away is not?

Do you understand that many IVF pregnancies are high risk and may ultimately require medical management aka abortions?

I’m firmly pro science and think access to both abortions and IVF is a wonderful thing, for avoidance of doubt.

One never sees protests outside fertility clinics and I wondered why.

I'm ProLife, but privately. I don't campaign for laws to change or even discuss it in general except in situations like this where a pro life perspective has been asked for.

I just believe that babies in the womb are real human lives and it is wrong to kill them.

Because I have that world view I do try and support single mothers in my life. I'm vocal about wanting more support and government help for children in care, single parents, maternity leave and maternity health care. And yes, I give money to charities that help children in care.

And I would never judge a woman who has had an abortion. Its just none of my business

Abortion isn’t against the law though @ClocksGoingBackwards . Never heard of The Abortion Act (1967)?

What also confuses me is I read a Smithsonian article last week about historical abortions. Religious scholars in the article argued that historically, abortions before the quickening were not considered problematic unless you were having sex outside of marriage. Abortion was not considered murder and a fetus was not considered life until after the quickening.

So my question is what changed for religious individuals? Is it just because you can see ultrasound images of the fetus?

You don’t need to actually have sex for sperm donation-
So no infidelity.

@lightisnotwhite

Maybe I am a bit thick? Not everyone can be as fruitfully bestowed with intelligence as you are.

Or perhaps, as this is a discussions board, I thought I’d start a discussion about a topical issue.

I guess we’ll never know.

"Abortion is taking a life"

This is a matter of opinion.

Abortion is not illegal.

Medical ethics should be of general importance to society, not something that should only be discussed by doctors and people when they actually get into the situation.

To be fair, I’m an atheist and don’t agree with gamete donation or surrogacy on ethical grounds, so it isn’t just people of faith who have those beliefs.

If it is none of your business as you say, what are you doing voicing an opinion on this thread? Or anywhere else for that matter?

Either it IS your business. Or it ISN'T.

Which one IS IT?

Many religious people consider the sexual act sacred and that reproduction shouldn't take place in inaction from it.

Can you say you are pro choice if you believe in abortion but up to a certain limit? That's where I'm at with it.

I acknowledge my views are probably skewed now though, as my son was born at 27 weeks and in the neonatal unit he was in there were several 24 weekers and even one 23 weeker. they happily all survived and went home. So for me, now I've seen what they look like it really adds an emotive side to it.

I also acknowledge the need for it if mums life is at risk or if the fetus turns out to not be compatible with life.

I'm not religious, I'm an antitheist if anything. Pro life but each to their own i dont care what anyone else chooses to do with their body, also pro IVF.

Isolation not inaction!!

just to add, family memebers were troubled initially about straight surrogacy ... the pastor then quoted ...
Genesis 38:8
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

so apparently that was ok...

Is straight surrogacy using the birth mother’s egg and body but the father’s sperm?

I wonder if the type of person who takes it upon themselves to protest abortion clinics is less likely to protest an ivf clinic because there are likely to be men, as well as women, attending them?

what is the expression 'benefits babies'?

I have never heard that before.

My guess is that you are discriminating and being hateful to people (and their familes on benefits).

I don't know if you are in the U.K. but we are in the middle of an economic crisis and the number of people having to rely on food banks and benefits is massive and growing.

What exactly do you mean by a 'benefit baby'?

I have reported your post as this expression is hateful and discriminatory.

Religious scholars have been debating whether abortion was as wrong before the quickening as after since at least Augustine. It isn't some new thing.

The distinction was fully dropped by the Catholics in 1869, so before ultrasound.

@stayingpositiveifpossible - some people are morally opposed to abortion but do not think it should be criminalized. That it's a personal choice, not a political one. Imo, we need more people like this in America right now.

Yep my fil is a full on Christian and vehemently against abortion and ivf. Not natural apparently. He's also a cunt of the highest order.

Well, forced birthers won't admit it but banning or restricting abortion isn't really about babies, I think moat of us know that.

If you have had sex willingly and worst of all enjoyed it then the punishment is a child you don't want. Only suitable 'victims' may be permitted a termination.

I really hate the two names. I am both pro life and pro choice. I am firmly against abortions and would never have one, but I think everyone should have access to whatever they feel is necessary. We are allowed to use our free will to live how we please. As a religious person, I believe we we all answer for our decisions and it is not for me to decide what limits to place on other humans.
It makes me really sad how there is this huge divide. You are either for or not and each side thinks the other is evil. That's just not true. This is such a huge and complex topic.
All actions have consequences. As a society we have become far too used to living in absolute freedom which just doesn't exist.

In the UK, abortion after 24 weeks is incredibly rare, like all UK abortions it can only happen based on the agreement of two doctors and their decision will not be based on any desires not to continue with pregnancy for psychological or general reasons. Instead it’s based on severe risk to the health of the mother or severe fetal abnormalities that were undetected earlier. According to doctors like Kate Harding, a consultant in obstetrics, these pregnancies are “always wanted pregnancies” that’s why they’ve continued to a late stage. The examples doctors like Harding have given are when the foetus has developed without a brain, or has an extra chromosome that has affected their development that means they will usually die before birth or shortly after birth. A very small number survive for a few weeks but have no prospect of life beyond that.

I'm not pro-life per se, but I do get the argument, and I don't think there's a knockout argument for the other side.

To answer your question, I've never seen it portrayed as 'taking a life, playing God'. To me the first part is more than enough. It doesn't matter whom you're playing, taking a human life is wrong, and shouldn't be allowed on a whim, just because.

The real question then becomes at what point do we view the child as alive and entitled to human rights.. As I said, any point is arbitrary, and there's no knockout argument on any side.