- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Southern Baptist Convention: IVF is a sin
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:41 pm to Carson123987
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:41 pm to Carson123987
quote:
I told them "ok so when you get cancer or something, make sure you dont do any chemo or radiation because it's obviously in gods plan and you shouldnt fight it" lol
Back in the day when men were real men every man died at 56 of mesothelioma
Wish we could go back
0
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:41 pm to jchamil
quote:
Wait, what?
He doesn't know that some couples use their own fertilized embryos during IVF
Yeah, lots of ignorance here about the whole process.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:41 pm to TDsngumbo
Too narrow a spectrum by viewing IVF as simply something women who have trouble getting pregnant attempt
Some arguments would be:
They deny the child it's natural father and mother, often times replacing them with same sex parents (which is another reason for the religious contempt for the practice)
They charge premium fees for the service placing a greater emphasis on ability to pay for the services rather than the physical and mental health of the child and it future
The unwanted/needed embryos are often destroyed or used for research. This is the case regardless if some are not. Plus you are talking about the storage of potentially millions of human lives for commoditization
When it comes a woman and her inability to have children or trouble having children, the Christian argument would be that although it may be difficult to accept and an unfortunate suffering that the woman would have endure in life, some women are not meant to have children. Woman are called to be open to new life and pursue procreation through marriage in Christian faiths regardless of their ability to do so. Life is not fair, bad things happen, people suffer under unfortunate circumstances but these circumstances however unfortunate would not change the the nature of the situation of IVF. If a woman is called to mother hood, adoption is always a viable option
The moral argument on IVF is a bit more ambiguous than abortion, and it is easier to sympathize with a woman longing to be a mother but being denied that by nature (in the instances where this is the reason behind the IVF services). It is a sad circumstance of life outside of her control (unlike abortion). but i am unsure of why it is difficult for some to see the potential moral pitfalls of the practice
Some arguments would be:
They deny the child it's natural father and mother, often times replacing them with same sex parents (which is another reason for the religious contempt for the practice)
They charge premium fees for the service placing a greater emphasis on ability to pay for the services rather than the physical and mental health of the child and it future
The unwanted/needed embryos are often destroyed or used for research. This is the case regardless if some are not. Plus you are talking about the storage of potentially millions of human lives for commoditization
When it comes a woman and her inability to have children or trouble having children, the Christian argument would be that although it may be difficult to accept and an unfortunate suffering that the woman would have endure in life, some women are not meant to have children. Woman are called to be open to new life and pursue procreation through marriage in Christian faiths regardless of their ability to do so. Life is not fair, bad things happen, people suffer under unfortunate circumstances but these circumstances however unfortunate would not change the the nature of the situation of IVF. If a woman is called to mother hood, adoption is always a viable option
The moral argument on IVF is a bit more ambiguous than abortion, and it is easier to sympathize with a woman longing to be a mother but being denied that by nature (in the instances where this is the reason behind the IVF services). It is a sad circumstance of life outside of her control (unlike abortion). but i am unsure of why it is difficult for some to see the potential moral pitfalls of the practice
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:42 pm to Mo Jeaux
this post has been marked unreadable by North Dallas Tiger his damned self
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 9:59 pm
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:43 pm to ThePoo
quote:
They deny the child it's natural father and mother, often times replacing them with same sex parents (which is another reason for the religious contempt for the practice)
Uh, you do know that some couples use their own sperm and eggs for IVF, right?
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:45 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:and?
Uh, you do know that some couples use their own sperm and eggs for IVF, right?
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:46 pm to ThePoo
quote:
often times replacing them with same sex parents
It isn't "often".
quote:
They charge premium fees for the service placing a greater emphasis on ability to pay for the services
So capitalism.
quote:
The unwanted/needed embryos are often destroyed or used for research. This is the case regardless if some are not.
Again it is not "often".
Let me propose this question. If a heterosexual couple use all their own embryos, then is IVF not a sin?
quote:
Life is not fair, bad things happen, people suffer under unfortunate circumstances but these circumstances however unfortunate would not change the the nature of the situation of IVF.
Ok, so you are refusing any life saving treatment?
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 4:48 pm
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:48 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
Just when I was thinking about declaring for the Baptists.
Well, one thing about Baptist, they don’t care what other Baptist think.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:49 pm to Jim Rockford
The entire denomination is the essence of a shite show.
They recite the pledge of allegiance but can’t get on board with the Nicene Creed?
They recite the pledge of allegiance but can’t get on board with the Nicene Creed?
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:50 pm to TigerDeacon
quote:
I personally see is as man striving forward as God intended. Plus the people that have the money to afford the procedure are the ones that you want to procreate.
They aren't shocking the embryos like Frankenstein. They are simply putting a sperm into an egg.
we literally bring people back to life (as well as keep people alive) using science/technology, is that sin also?
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:51 pm to TDsngumbo
quote:
I'm pro life but considering IVF as a sin is retarded.
Then one of two things:
1) you’re not fully pro-life
Or
2) you’re ignorant to what goes on during IVF and the number of babies destroyed to get one to birth.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:51 pm to North Dallas Tiger
quote:
I define my life by my adherence to God's Laws as opposed to material and worldly things
God didn't say IVF is a sin.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:51 pm to nicholastiger
quote:
do you let religion define your life? no one makes you practice baptist way of life you can practice whatever faith you want
Except the Baptists in Louisiana keep citing to their religion when they lobby for laws that limit the liberty of others. If they stop doing that, I’ll stop caring about what they think is sinful.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:52 pm to North Dallas Tiger
quote:
Think for a moment about the power to create a human life. The power of creation is sacred. Our power as humans to create a human life in the image of the Great Creator is very Holy and Divine. It's easy to see why. The power of creation is the power of God. Where in our Father God's creation (Mother Nature) do you see IVF?
This is as unnnatural as all the other stuff we all admonish in this, the month of June, in the year of our Lord, 2024...
Amen
ok well never seek medical treatment then
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:52 pm to TigerDeacon
quote:
Ok, so you are refusing any life saving treatment
Obviously
Science defenders will be in Biden’s fema camp while I’m in heaven
Speaking of which, did y’all stand next to the microwave too much?
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:54 pm to el Gaucho
American Evangelicals should start reading N.T. Wright and John Stott, if they are able.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:56 pm to Jim Rockford
Feel really bad for a family member of mine.
She spent a few decades as a catholic school teacher and now does volunteer work at the school/church. Probably on church property serving her community 5 or 6 days a week.
She will spend all of eternity burning in hell because her 3 kids were conceived through ivf. Too bad.
She spent a few decades as a catholic school teacher and now does volunteer work at the school/church. Probably on church property serving her community 5 or 6 days a week.
She will spend all of eternity burning in hell because her 3 kids were conceived through ivf. Too bad.
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:56 pm to hubertcumberdale
quote:Unless it's a terminal issue, you'd do better to seek alternative, natural treatments as opposed to, well, you know...
ok well never seek medical treatment then
Posted on 6/12/24 at 4:58 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:This is just pure fallacy.
She will spend all of eternity burning in hell because her 3 kids were conceived through ivf. Too bad.
Our Father in Heaven is a God of Mercy and Justice. What matters is understanding and recognition of the Almighty's Laws. This is why the Great Master Yeshua delivered a message of salvation thru repentance and good works
Posted on 6/12/24 at 5:01 pm to TigerDeacon
quote:At least 1 out of every 10, which is often
It isn't "often".
quote:Correct, but we aren't talking about tennis shoes and hand bags
So capitalism.
quote:2 potential moral pitfalls from a religious perspective. One being that God would call the couple to bring forth life within the bounds of marriage.
Again it is not "often". Let me propose this question. If all embryos were used. Then is IVF not a sit?
The other situation that you mention would simply be the nature of IVF itself. It is a numbers game that by it's nature must create excess in order to succeed on a viable level. You are harvesting components that should not be harvested. Now would it be potentially different if you said that all potential life would be given full opportunity to be 1) born 2) raised by natural parents 3) no excess potential life would be harmed to achieve 1 and 2..then yes it would probably be different for many...BUT that is not something we are capable of so it is moot
quote:How will my life saving treatment effect the potential ability of others to live...once I know that I can answer this question
Ok, so you are refusing any life saving treatment?
This post was edited on 6/12/24 at 5:03 pm
Page 3 of 27
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News