Posted on 12/12/2008 6:09:21 AM PST by NYer
THE Vatican today said life was sacred at every stage of its existence and condemned artificial fertilisation, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning and drugs which block pregnancy from taking hold.
A long-awaited document on bioethics by the Vatican's doctrinal body also said the so-called "morning after pill" and the drug RU-486, which blocks the action of hormones needed to keep a fertilised egg implanted in the uterus, fall "within the sin of abortion" and are gravely immoral.
"Dignitas Personae" (dignity of a person), an Instruction of Certain Bioethical Questions," is an attempt to bring the Church up to date with recent advances in science and medicine.
It said human life deserved respect "from the very first stages of its existence (and) can never be reduced merely to a group of cells."
"The human embryo has, therefore, from the very beginning, the dignity proper to a person," the docment by the Congregations of the Doctrine of the Faith said.
It said most forms of artifical fertilisation "are to be excluded" because "they substitute for the conjugal act ... which alone is truly worthy of responsible procreation".
It condemned in-vitro fertilisation, saying the techniques "proceed as if the human embryo were simply a mass of cells to be used, selected and discarded."
The highly technical document said only adult stem cell research was moral because embryonic stem cell research involved the destruction of embryos.
In the document, the Vatican also defended its right to intervene on such matters.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
You're showing yourself up to be nothing but an anti-Catholic disruptor.
You know what they say about assumptions.
FACT: I did not defend the killing of human offpring. IVF is a procedure that does not strictly result in the killing of human offpring. The disposal of the embryos that are not used, is not strictly part of IVF. The embryos can be frozen in perpetuity, in order to avoid its disposal.
FACT: Bitches being forcibly impregnated or mated, is not the norm, in the wild.
LOL, your attempts to run away from your own statements, ar hilarious! The threat was not you calling me a newbie, as you attempted to divert. The threat was specifically, this:
"(we’ve got a live one here)"
When do I have to expect your friends here?
Check back, the thread is in the news section, Champ! It’s valid for argument. Check back on the meaning of a discussion forum, Champ!
And yet you posted on a thread about the Vatican? TROLL, BEGONE!!!!
Fertilized eggs are people too.
It’s in the NEWS section. N. E. W. S.
Consult a dictionary on the meaning of the said term.
Ask the mod to move it to Religion, and converted to, specifically, a Caucus thread, if you are afraid of discussions.
Where the hell is a bolt of lightning when you need one? I’m in no mood for this cr@p today.
Mighty selfish of you to breed embryonic humans for the sake of redundancy.
And did I suggest otherwise?
Why, if you bothered to read the earlier posts by me, you'd see that I advocated preserving embryos in perpetuity.
Flushing them down the drain is strictly not IVF. It's what's done after the procedure. Strictly.
Mighty selfish of you to not want childless couples, their own biological children.
I don't really disagree with you on your points here. However, you haven't expounded on which rights "exist" and thus must be defended. Right to life? Right to liberty? Right to health care? Right to feel good about yourself? I ask about your definition of Man because, if a right exists, it exists for all Mankind; otherwise, it is a mere privilege which can be revoked by: the State/your parents/someone bigger and stronger/whathaveyou.
“If IVF is a right ( as you say) then someone has to pay for it.”
Please show me where I said IVF is a “right.” (cue the crickets)
I think it should exist for those who can afford it and want to try it, but a right? Not hardly.
Yes, by advocating perpetual imprisonment of other human beings, you truly are God's noblest of men.
LOL back. No coersion, free will. I have heard both sides of the argument and chose to believe in God. The other argument seems silly to me. I don’t believe we are here by accident, any more than I believe a building can be built without an architect or a poem can be written by shaking a bag of letters up, dumping them out, and falling into something that makes sense. I believe in intellegent design because bringing order out of chaos requires it. If that be the case, a designer is necessary, and therefore I choose to believe in God. It is not about the security, it is thoughtful logic.
as to the your genes being carried on better, LOL again, because we are taught to be fruitful and multiply, we do so. Many more christians have extremely large families and furthermore, have far fewer abortions than do those who argue for invitro due to that whole selfishness entitlement mentality I was speaking about to begin with.
I repeat myself. If your argument is what constitutes imprisonment, then what about artificial intervention to keep the terminally ill, alive?
Mind you, even frozen embryos degenerate over time.
That's not selfishness at all, since it has nothing to do with me (my self). It's all about the humans you want bred and imprisoned in perpetuity (if not dismembered for science or discarded entirely). Your position denies THEIR rights.
Yes, the wrongfully-imprisoned have been known to rot in jail. Read Solzhenitsyn.
Life begins at the moment of contraception.
>>FACT: I did not defend the killing of human offpring. IVF is a procedure that does not strictly result in the killing of human offpring. The disposal of the embryos that are not used, is not strictly part of IVF. The embryos can be frozen in perpetuity, in order to avoid its disposal. <<
“Can be” and “are”. Really different statements there. How about if we go with “normally”?
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004889.html
>>FACT: Bitches being forcibly impregnated or mated, is not the norm, in the wild. <<
*snicker* This statement shows your ignorance. In the “wild” a bitch will come into season twice a year. She will mate twice a year. In breeding a bitch will come into season twice a year. Breeders will bring a sire once a year. And guess what? There is no “forcing” to the mate. They do it themselves. All of this being neither her nor there understanding that humans are NOT on the same level as animals. Well, maybe you want to be, but most of us aren’t.
>>When do I have to expect your friends here? <<
Pinging people to a thread is normal on FR.
When you are no longer a newbie, you’ll see.
“... isn’t IVF a work-around of what nature proposes?”
Hmmm, so what about organ transplants, medications that prolong or save lives, life support systems, and on and on. Many of those people just decades ago would have died. Aren’t they a “work-around” of what nature proposes?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.