Trump is correct in this case. Moment of conception is a Catholic doctrine, this is why Catholics cannot use birth control. But the Protestant majority does not follow that doctrine, as evidenced by their own doctrine approved use of birth control. IVF is a blessing to couples that have fertility problems and it’s a good thing.
It’s very unfair and inaccurate to blame all infertility on abortion. Many who have never had an abortion have difficulties.
It's not just a Catholic thing. It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception. This has been known without a doubt for at least the last 50 years, At the point of conception everything that is necessary to develop into a human being is present, including its own unique DNA. Allowed to complete its natural development, it will not turn into a kidney or lung or an undifferentiated mass of cells, but a human being.
The real point is whether the destruction of human life (from IVF, for example), is any different than the murder of a born person. Since science now unequivocally tells us that at conception it is a human being, that should be the starting point for any consideration of this question, not the aftermath.
As I said in another thread on this topic, when we speak of human zygotes, embryos, fetuses, babies, children, teenagers, adults, middle-aged, and old age, these are all simply descriptions of the various stages of human development. Some occur on one side of the birth canal, others on the other side. Some may have been conceived under less-than-ideal circumstances. Some may be imperfect or unwanted by their parents or by society. But all are living human beings. All have an equal human dignity. None should unjustly be deprived of life.
So where do we draw the line at the taking of an innocent human life? What difference does location or stage of human development make? If we lower ourselves to countenance taking the life one category of people for our own convenience and satisfaction, who is next?
Before it can become a legal issue, the moral issue has to be addressed. Before there were written laws against pre-meditated murder, there was a general consensus that it was wrong and this was the basis of the law against murder.
Even though it seems clear to me and others that based on the scientific evidence it is rational to conclude that human life begins at conception, it is an unfortunate fact there is doubt or disbelief about this in a large segment of the population. Is it a human life, or isn't it? If it isn't, you can do whatever you want with it. If it is, it should be treated like all other human life. If one simply does not know, it should be given the benefit of the doubt of being human until proved otherwise. It would be akin to seeing a human shaped bag in the middle of the road. If there's a chance there's a human being in there, do you stop or go around it, or just run over it because you don't know? If you are going to err, it's always wise to err on the side of life.
Not a Catholic but I think the moment of conception is the logical starting point of a human life. It is the point at which a baby will be born unless something goes wrong. My hope is that by making IVF less expensive people will only fertilize eggs they will implant and give the same chance as the naturally conceived. My fear is cheaper IVF will simply expand the current practices which involve freezing and/or discarding embryos.