Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
It all fits. You have to look at the whole overarching project: the deconstruction of sex. That is, breaking apart of male and female, sex and gender, intercourse and fertility, structure and function, into fragmentary pieces, and then cobbling them together again into some different design as to ourselves seems most useful.
The artificial human reproduction technologies are morally flawed because they separate the act of marital lovemaking from the conception of the child. It is not a healing of, but a replacement for the human sexual design. It doesn't "heal infertility": before the "treatment" the couple were unable to conceive via natural intercourse; after the "treatment" they are still unable to conceive via natural intercourse. The underlying disability hasn't been cured or healed, it hasn't even been addressed.
Artificial insemination splits sex off from procreation, leaves it out of the fertility equation. This renders the sexual act insignificant and inconsequential, and transfers the real significance and consequence to a laboratory production process and a commercial transaction.
My heart goes out to people who have medical fertility problems. I would urge them to seek true healing solutions which respect and restore the spousal one-flesh nature of human procreation. One place to start is Natural Procreative Technology: NaProTech (LINK) They hold out the hope of real healing for the infertile.
Smart approach to help infertile couples have babies via, guess what? -- sex!