The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Michael_P, Deirdre Glasheen, JohnFromRuthenia, Michael Labish, meeklytrying
5,786 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
2 members (2 invisible), 98 guests, and 18 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
Church of the Holy Trinity (UGCC) - Brazil
by Santiago Tarsicio, March 17
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
Papal Audience 10 November 2017
by JLF, November 10
Upgraded Russian icon corner
Upgraded Russian icon corner
by The young fogey, October 20
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,077
Posts414,157
Members5,786
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#177148 05/31/05 08:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 611
T
Tammy Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
T
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 611
I'm probably going to get a hot issue started here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/washpost/20050531/ts_washpost/catholics_split_on_embryo_issue

According to the article, adoption of embryos is one of the few issues on which the Vatican has not yet taken a stand. The pro side is that if these embryos - which ARE human beings - are not adopted, they may end up victims of stem cell research. The con side is that by adopting an embryo, a couple is complicitly involved in in vitro fertilization, and the implantation of the embryo is not the natural procreative act.

I thought of another con that isn't mentioned in the article: in the anecdote used in the article, the woman adopted 11 embryos, and ended up with one full-term pregnancy. What about the other 10 that were lost to miscarriage? (This is part of the reason that in vitro fertilization is not allowed for Catholics in the first place.)

What do you guys think? Should the Vatican allow or disallow the practice of adopting embryos?

#177149 05/31/05 08:30 PM
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Allow it. The act is done to save a life, which may not be a successful attempt, but no one should be penalized for trying.

Gaudior, very pro-life

#177150 05/31/05 11:24 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
I would agree with Gaudior on this one. I'm not sure how long these embryos can live in a frozen state (I dare NOT say "shelf life"), but the fact that they might not live any other way except through implantation says to me that it is worth the risk.

Implantation in such cases would not only be moral, I would see it as VIRTUOUS so long as one avoids the issue of multiple implants and the subsequent scraping of the uterine wall, which is abortion.

As far as the tacit approval of an immoral act, I don't believe that because one wants to rescue a child that was created through immoral means that one is therefore complicit in or approving of the act that created that child. (Anymore than adopting a child produced through fornication implies tacit approval of the act that produced the child.) In a general sense, one could argue that there is some complicity with an industry that has been built around the evils of "embryo production", but it is only done to prevent the industry and the professionals within that industry from comitting murder against the child within its care.

My two cents -

Gordo

#177151 05/31/05 11:33 PM
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
The uh.."shelf-life" has been proven viable after 3.5 years of freezing...

Gaudior, adding commentary

#177152 06/01/05 03:09 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 320
eli Offline
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 320
Maybe we should deal first with those who MAKE THEM ...

If life is already there, the Church cannot deny its right to live.
However, on the meantime, nothing is being done to those who took the right of creating and demolishing life to their hands. (Do you know how many embryos have to die so one can eventually survive?)

#177153 06/01/05 03:54 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,693
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,693
I think the root of some of this is widespread disregard for, and disobedience to, the will of God. I have known folks to whom God sent children. They didn't want them. I have also known those to whom God apparently did not send children. They spent thousands of dollars on every medical procedure they could find. Now granted, we can't always know the will of God in someone else's life, but we do know that these in vitro procedures are wrong.

#177154 06/02/05 04:15 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 641
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 641
The issue still remains, though. Once someone has disregarded God's will as you describe it and has created these embryos through "science," then: what next? Little humans sitting on a shelf waiting for death or harvesting?

If a couple is willing to step in and go through all the pain and joy and expense (emotional, spiritual, financial) of bringing these little humans into the world and raising them to adulthood, SHOULD they do that? Isn't it more moral than letting them die?

Many people who adopt these embryos do so out of love and out of a conviction that all human life is sacred, not out of a selfish desire to have children at all costs. Some do so even though they have children of their own.

One argument proponents of stem cell research use is that these embryos are slated to "expire" anyway - no one wants them - they are going in the trash. Well, not if they are adopted.

We shouldn't interfere in the proper order of Creation and when we do we breed awful moral and ethical results. Children should come about the usual way or not at all. But once some selfish couple has interfered in the proper order and has left behind a shelf of embryos, should the innocent die of neglect if a more altruistic couple steps in and says, "hey, we'll adopt the embryo and give him/her a chance at life?" Or should they be taken for research, as proponents of stem cell programs argue, since they are almost certainly going in the trash anyway?

I wish there was more guidance on this from higher up. To me, I think the couple who adopts a forgotten embryo for the right reasons has chosen to turn an evil technology to good purpose. A big part of sin, after all, is defined by intent. I imagine it is very difficult for church ethicists to come up with the number of conceivable (no pun intended) situations that could arise under these adoption scenarios. But given the stem cell debate, which has changed the IVF playing field just a little, it is really important to keep on these issues. To adopt or not to adopt? Much seems to hang on the intent (moral or immoral) of the persons doing the adopting.

Quote
Originally posted by byzanTN:
I think the root of some of this is widespread disregard for, and disobedience to, the will of God. I have known folks to whom God sent children. They didn't want them. I have also known those to whom God apparently did not send children. They spent thousands of dollars on every medical procedure they could find. Now granted, we can't always know the will of God in someone else's life, but we do know that these in vitro procedures are wrong.


Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5