Actress Brooke Shields kills 140 of her very own Children by undergoing 7 IVF Treatments

Various | 07.25.04

[nmh]

I have mixed emotions on IVF. My Roman Catholic neighbor resorted to this and was successful the first time and then the second time using ONE egg each. She was unable to ovulate. Through using IVF the former second grade teacher could now have a child.

OTOH when someone uses multiple eggs and then destroys them because they don't want twins or triplets I see that as murder.

It is quite possible that through technology, when used properly God may approve of this however I have NO doubt that destroying eggs or embryonic stem cell research is not a good way to use technology.

[narses]

Torie says:

I draw the line at sentience.

Really? When does "sentience" begin? When does "sentience" end? Is a sleeping man "sentient"? Is a comoatose man "sentient"? Is an alzheimers patient "sentient"?

Now, for the big question, WHO DECIDES?

[Drango]

The bottom line question for us was: which is the greater passion, to have a child or to honor God?

Interesting, but I reject your false choice. You can honor God by having a child...and YES, despite this thread, it can be from IVF.

[TradicalRC]

Projecting again. How can my identifying you as a fanatic cause you to think in anyway that I am for baby killing. What is wrong with you and your fellow Talaban?

Let's see. If I am pro-life and you are calling me a fanatic and a member of the taliban, it's not really a stretch to think that you believe children are disposable. If you want to call that "projecting" then go right ahead. Your grasp of language must be at least as good as your grasp of logic.

[DoughtyOne]

Did you say this to me or not?

Said by a person judging his heart out, without even taking the time to think.

Hmm, pardon me if that doesn't sound just a bit judgemental?  And to be judgemetal, you have to think you're omnipotent.  Well, you aren't.  You have your opinion of what is right and wrong.  Others have their opinon.  People come on this thread and start dumping on others for trying to have children.  Who's the judgemental team here anyway?  Lordy, talk about the kettle calling the pot black.

What do you mean I haven't taken time to think about this topic?  I've given this topic about ten years of thought, because at one time I bought the "choice" line hook and sinker.  I was wrong and I changed my stance.  I'd rather see zero abortions and no fertilized eggs to be destroyed in a perfect world, but his world isn't perfect.

I'm still trying to get partial birth abortions ruled illegal.  Then I'd like to see anything over two months ruled illegal.  Then I'd like to move the goal line towards zero.  By making the starting point, the destruction of the fertilzed egg, pro-lifers drive away anyone who might possibly side with them.  Hell, they scare people to death.  They do more harm than good to the cause.  They drive people away.  Nice trick.  

What if God judges people by your strict, self-righteous actions.

What a load of hogwash!  Take a look at my first post on this thread.  Who's the one doing the judging on this thread?  Take a look at the title if you've forgotten what it says.

Do you tell you children top never think about the consequences of their actions, just do what's easiest?

The God I know would not ask loving husbands and wives to forgoe having children because some fertilized eggs might be destroyed in the process.  If your's does, I am sorry for you.

As for my children, they have pretty good moral standards.  They do a great job of running their own lives.  They aren't quite to the point in their life where they've taken on the task of telling everyone else how to live.

[pascendi]

Keep it up, Coleus; good job.

[pascendi]

"I pray to God that nobody is judged by this rigid a standard when the time comes."

Count on it. React accordingly.

"If so, no person on earth will be saved."

But you aren't doing the judging now, are you? Perhaps you're just wrong in judging this conclusion.

[DoughtyOne]

LOL, thanks Jehovah.

[nickcarraway]

You were the one who brought up judging, so I called you on YOUR OWN WORDS. I'm sorry if you didn't think through what you said. Maybe nexdt time you shouldn't attack someone without knowing the issues.

[nickcarraway]

Excuse me. Aren't you the one who posted this five minutes after the threadre went up: I pray to God that nobody is judged by this rigid a standard when the time comes. If so, no person on earth will be saved.

Were you really able to read the whole thing and understand it's complexities in five minutes?

[DoughtyOne]

Nick, you're lost in space fella. You didn't respond to a thing I said, just lauched further into your loosing arguement.

The judging is coming from your team ace. If you can't even agree to that, then you've lost the central theme of this thread, damning someone for going invitro.

[DoughtyOne]

I read the title, something that you are still trying to come to grips with. Respond to me again when you've determined that it's somewhat judgemental. Otherwise it's pointless to talk to someone who won't acknowledge reality.

[Askel5]

=== This is an honest question from someone who has a hard time understanding why evil is often successful.... Why innocents are allowed to suffer. I can accept to a certain degree that God has more of a 'hands off' approach than I would wish regarding what His creations ~do~ in life, but I'd have to think if He is really sovereign, then NO ONE could create a life that was outside His will. If it ~is~ done, doesn't it go without saying that it is His will being done?



The thing you have to remember is that God, like any good father, loves his children enough to let them make mistakes. That's the essence of our Free Will: an ability to choose and to do Evil.

Does that help somewhat?

Additionally, it might help to view the artificial creation of life as a natural evil from which God (and God alone) brings forth the good that are those few human lives which survive the process in which countless human lives are sacrificed.

The universe operates according to certain laws. Just as it is certainly in His power (but against his plan for us and our freedom) to interfere in our Free Will, the natural laws also must operate in a consistent fashion.

Men are perverse but they aren't stupid. It was only a matter of time before they began unlocking the secrets of conception and gestation. (Artificial uteruses, I'm sure, will be popular with Tomorrow's Hollywood starlets who are afraid to loosen their boyish waistlines with pregnancy.)

Man's quest to manufacture a more perfect human and condition a psychologically and spiritually New Man all are part and parcel of His fallen nature ... that stain of original sin by which he inevitably tries to usurp the place of God.

The Redemption stands testament to God's will in these matters. There will always be room for forgiveness by Him who alone knows the hearts of men.

[Askel5]

I can't tell you how disappointed I am that you appear to believe it's "God's will" that the sterile and the homosexual should reproduce at the cost of dozens of human lives for the one selected for implantation.


God's original plan was corrupted by Man's succumbing to exactly the temptation you have succumbed to here: the usurping of God's place in determining what is Good and what is Evil.

Human life is good. It begins at the moment of conception. You cannot pretend that -- simply because it comforts you personally that you can't fathom Death's causing pain to an embryo -- it's okay to kill some human lives so that the more Desirable of their kin end up fully human in your estimation.

You're a good man, Ron. I beg you to rethink the path you are taking here.

[HairOfTheDog]

Does that help somewhat?

No. it doesn't. But I am glad it helps you.

Additionally, it might help to view the artificial creation of life as a natural evil from which God (and God alone) brings forth the good that are those few human lives which survive the process in which countless human lives are sacrificed.

Terrific feel-good rationalization. ;~D

[DoughtyOne]

Askel, my aunt had between three and five miscarriages before she delivered her first child.  Does she suffer the same damnation from you folks that Brook Shild's does?  If not who does, God?  I don't ask this to be blasphemous, but the truth is, even under the best of intentions, fertilized eggs even further along than the fertilized eggs of Brooks Shield's are destroyed by natural causes.  Why is it worse when humans do their best to allow a woman to become pregnant and deliver a healthy child?  If the destroyed fertilized egg is a sin, then someone must be responsible in all instances, whether natural or not.  Who is the guilty party when a woman miscarries?

[dsc]

"Denying a woman the ability to try to have a child because a fertilized egg might be destroyed"

Fertilized egg = human being.

[dsc]

"You, of course, are entitled to your opinbion and I'll respect it. I'm entitled to mine."

Actually, since error has no rights, you are only entitled to your opinion in the sense that we as a society have agreed to accord each other the right to be wrong.

Morally, you have no right to hold that opinion, since it is erroneous.

[South40]

Morally, you have no right to hold that opinion, since it is erroneous.

Sure thing, nutcase.

Peddle your lunacy somewhere else; we're not buying.

[DoughtyOne]

Well since the destruction of a fertilized egg is a sin, the killing of a human being, the only way to make sure this doesn't happen again is to quit trying to have children. Do you have children? A miscarriage is one dead human. I advocate the ceasation of sex worldwide while we sort this out.