Making phony babies just makes the world more horrible.

[Heyo]

Not everyone shares your aesthetic or religious views. You & those
who agree with you are free to refrain from any artificiality in conception.
Those who'd gi hi tech harm no one. So they're free to follow that path.
Everyone wins.

@Jonathan Bailey
I explicitly asked him/her if s/he directed his/her message towards those who share his/her beliefs. No answer. I suspect a case of "holier than thou" Christian who is preaching his/her values and isn't aware of / doesn't care about different views - and is too coward to admit it. You know, the kind that makes aggressive atheism a necessity.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I sat next to the pilot on an airplane one time.
That makes me quite knowledgeable, and well
qualified to make life and death decisions for others.

I spent the night at a Holiday Inn. I need some 3-O silk, a bone saw and a Metzler clamp. I don't think that brain tumor really is inoperable.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It is so beautiful when a man and woman become one flesh to bring a new beautiful life into this world. It is the most beautiful thing God or nature ever created. It is so beautiful that a human baby arises from a euphoric orgasm. It is so divine that an angel of a little baby come from a lovely warm vagina visited by a handsome penis. There is nothing beautiful about fertility clinics, cloning, Dixie cups or glass test tubes.

It is so beautiful that animals bring new life into the world by becoming one flesh as a stallion and a mare and a dog and a b_tch.

It is so beautiful that when it is against the will of God or nature for a man and woman to become one flesh to bring a new life into the world that a responsible married couple with means take a child in need into the home to provide for him or her and give him or her love, discipline and proper guidance.

Adoption is charitable and even a Christian thing to do. It is a selfless service to humanity.

Nobody cares what you think is beautiful.

I asked you a simple question.

I was born through IVF. Do I have a right to exist, or am I a "fake baby without a soul"?

 

[Jonathan Bailey]

Mother Nature doesn't care one way or the other.


Where in the Bible does it say that there will be no soul unless there is penile/vaginal copulation? Where in the Bible does it say there will be a soul in any event?


Perhaps you are referring to...

So you don't think God is real. Strange, I would have thought you did believe in God.

I'm agnostic about God but still consider him a possibility. That's why I say GOD or NATURE whatever the case may be.

 

[Jonathan Bailey]

Nobody cares what you think is beautiful.

I asked you a simple question.

I was born through IVF. Do I have a right to exist, or am I a "fake baby without a soul"?

I don't know what you are. You could be a bot.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't know what you are. You could be a bot.

I'm telling you what I am. I am a human being that was born through IVF.

Now, do I have a right to exist, or am I a "fake baby with no soul"?

 

[Jonathan Bailey]

I'm telling you what I am. I am a human being that was born through IVF.

Now, do I have a right to exist, or am I a "fake baby with no soul"?

I don't know.

 

[Polymath257]

I don't know.

So you are unsure whether all the people who were conceived by IVF have a right to exist and whether they are a 'fake baby (person) with no soul'?????

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't know.

It appears that you don't actually have the courage of your convictions, then.

For all your ranting in the OP, when you are confronted by somebody who is actually the product of IVF treatments, you immediately stop being able to tell them that you think they're a "fake baby" with "no soul". Because you know as well as everybody else here that such a belief is abhorrent.

In future, think before you type.

 

[Revoltingest]

If our population gets much higher it won't be a personal preference, and we may need very strict reproductive laws because there are too many of us. Small acts now, such as promoting adoption, could help to create a big enough difference so our population does not get too much higher.

I'm not arguing against adoption.
But I oppose interfering with the choice to pursue technologically
assisted conception. It's no more wrong than what Catholics
would call "natural".

 

[ChristineM]

The Dixie cup, silly. Exposure to light. Who knows what DNA corruption occurs when sperms and eggs are handled unnaturally? What if the so-called "baby" is "conceived" without a soul in this unnatural fashion?

Don't fool around with the devil's craft.

Do you really think doctors are generally incompetent?

What is a soul, show me one

 

[Revoltingest]

@Jonathan Bailey
I explicitly asked him/her if s/he directed his/her message towards those who share his/her beliefs. No answer. I suspect a case of "holier than thou" Christian who is preaching his/her values and isn't aware of / doesn't care about different views - and is too coward to admit it. You know, the kind that makes aggressive atheism a necessity.

We must keep our eye on legislators,
lest religious authoritarianism creep in.

 

[ChristineM]

@Jonathan Bailey

Here is a conundrum for you.
A married couple could not have children, the husband was infertile. They looked at IVF, impossible, his spermatozoa were essentially nonexistent. They considered adoption but both really wanted a child with at least some of the parents DNA. They considered IVF with an anonymous surrogate male donor, it just seemed too impersonal. The conclusion they came to is take a surrogate father but conceive the natural way.

Where do you stand on a child conceived this way

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you really think doctors are generally incompetent?

I think it's about doctors being servants of Satan.
Evil is wrought by intent, not incompetence.

 

[McBell]

Living things should only be made as nature or God intended.

The Catholic church frowns upon artificial insemination, test-tube babies, cloning and other unnatural means of manufacturing "life" and so do I. I would even avoid buying a "dog" fabricated by artificial insemination as well.

If a woman can't get pregnant by a man in the natural way, then the married couple should adopt a nature-made child or more instead of cooking up some monster in the womb with science-fiction-like technology .

Stop being selfish: adopt. Mother Nature doesn't want you to reproduce for a reason if you are not fertile.

OK Boomer

 

[ChristineM]

I think it's about doctors being servants of Satan.
Evil is wrought by intent, not incompetence.

My stomach proves that wrong

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'm not arguing against adoption.
But I oppose interfering with the choice to pursue technologically
assisted conception. It's no more wrong than what Catholics
would call "natural".

I guess I would label a promotion of adoption over IVF as a degree of interfering, as a pressure to do this instead of this.

 

[Revoltingest]

My stomach proves that wrong

Your stomach is wiser than 2000 year old goatherds.

 

[ChristineM]

Your stomach is wiser than 2000 year old goatherds.

Is is now ;-/

 

[Revoltingest]

I guess I would label a promotion of adoption over IVF as a degree of interfering, as a pressure to do this instead of this.

Promote not reproducing by any method.