Lets see, what else. No braces. No clothes. No jewelry. No haircuts. The list is almost endless.
I think your point can also apply to the Church's opposition to genetic engineering/cloning.
I can understand being opposed to certain uses of genetic engineering, but I don't get the categorical opposition to the concept as a whole.
Presumably, it is just fine for science to intervene to get rid of disease or defect after a person is born. Something as "unnatural" as using pharmaceuticals to attack cancer or lasers to improve vision is morally acceptable.
But using technology to change the genetic structure of a zygote is alleged to be gravely immoral. Even if the procedure did not result in destroying any life, and even if the modification was made to prevent a serious handicap, I've been told by some Catholics that it would be wrong to use genetic engineering in that scenario.
I don't see why it's morally acceptable to let a disorder fully manifest itself in a person's body and then attack it with a scalpel, but it's NOT morally acceptable to prevent the disorder in the first place using a different set of instruments.
Because prevention of the disorder in the first place, according to the scientific community, is much easier accomplished through abortion. There have been more than enough instances of children fated to be born with Down's Syndrome who come out perfectly normal. How many are aborted withouth actually carrying the defect? How many embryoes will be needlessly manipulated in fear of a disease that can be easily misdiagnosed? At the end of the day, genetic manipulation is a ranking of human worth from worthless (ill) to priceless (healthy).
I’ve always seen God as acting through man , in this case through science. A science that can cure disease is surely a gift from God. Like any gift it can be abused.Just my 2 cents