I raise the same objections to euthanasia. Doctors are expected to do what they can to heal the body. Doctors are not expected to decide when life should end. Likewise doctors should not be deciding when life begins.
If God gave us our brains for a reason, it was to solve problems for our own survival (as a species, as individuals or as families). Infertility is as valid a problem for our solution as any other you can name.
Infertility is not a problem for the species. It might even be a solution for the species.
In any event, we are not to play God in deciding who dies or in deciding who is brought to life. God gave us brains to figure out many things. Not all of them are pleasing to Him.
The technology pioneered by doctors "just trying to help infertile couples" is now leading us to cloning. Which will lead to future disasters. Yes, we have the brains to do this. Do we have the brains not to?
SD
Dodge. What about antibiotics?
Infertility is not a problem for the species.
Dodge. It is a problem for individuals and families. Now what?
In any event, we are not to play God in deciding who dies or in deciding who is brought to life.
Catch 22: by banning IVF or cloning, you are deciding who is brought to life.
Not all of them are pleasing to Him.
It's not for you or the State to be the arbiter of what's pleasing to Him. When you say it's not pleasing to Him, what you mean is that it's not pleasing to You.
The technology pioneered by doctors "just trying to help infertile couples" is now leading us to cloning.
That completes the logical circle. I suppose it carries weight with anyone who objects to the ideas of IVF and cloning in the first place.
It's like saying that Harry Potter books are evil mainly because they promote reading skills, which can then be used to read other evil books, such as the sequels. (The solution, of course, is illiteracy.)
Which will lead to future disasters.
Name some.