IcePrincessKRS Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Actually they use a condom with some holes in it so the marital act isn't violated. Not always--sometimes masturbation is used--the "condom with holes" is the only method that can be considered morally acceptable, though--I forget what the comdom-device is called, though. (Some will argue that its borderline because since some of the sperm is retained in the device and then "injected" into the woman after intercourse, so its not done entirely naturally.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 The 30000 people that were destroyed were not from 1 AI attempt. It is conglomeration of stored fertilized eggs which means they are concieved persons. AI is not done with just 1 egg. That's not efficient. As many eggs as possible are harvested from a woman after hormonal treatements to bring many to the proper maturation. All the eggs are exposed to sperm and many become fertilized. A higher level of birth defects exist in these concieved persons as well. They also are more likely to be aborted by the parents if the defects are found, which they usually are. This is the same problem with people who take fertility treatments. The parents of my youngest Godson adopted him from VietNam after about 6 years of trying to conceive children. During the week of his Baptism, they concieved a child (who is due to be born next week). No artificial treatments or Doctors at all. Is God cool or what? B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellenita Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 The success rate of AI is actually quite low and that is rarely discussed by the doctors involved in promoting the process, for obvious reasons since many are making careers out of it. It is not unusual for couples to go through years attempting to have a baby by this means and there has been very little consideration of the emotional trauma this causes them or the additional pressure on their relationship, let alone the financial cost often involved. Interestingly there has been a feminist critique of the process - though clearly not from the same understanding of what constitutes 'God given life'! I have a similar story to JasJis. Cousins of mine tried AI for many years but then finally said that it was important to sort out their own relationship as their marriage was under terrible strain as a result. As part of the process of healing the marriage, they accepted that they were not going to have a baby of their own and started looking at adoption - almost immediately my cousin fell pregnant! They now have two children! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 So it is morally wrong for say, a husband who is infertile (say he cant have an erection or has a low sperm count) and his wife, to concieve by artificial insemination from the husbands sperm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 So it is morally wrong for say, a husband who is infertile (say he cant have an erection or has a low sperm count) and his wife, to concieve by artificial insemination from the husbands sperm? Simply, YES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 (edited) I know what fertilized eggs can be stored via invitro...but artificial insemination in its truest sense just means that the sperm is inserted via an alternative means. I don't mean to sound excessive but think 'turkey baster'. I don't think the scenario where '3000 human babies were trashed' was from AI, because Artificial Insemination is a necessarily intrauterine procedure, it's usually performed in cases where, say, a the lining/mucous of the woman's uterous is inhospitable to the sperm, the male's sperm count is low etc...So, i'm a bit confused by that statement... It's just a tad more complicated than that, FreeSoul. The child is conceived outside of the woman's body, in a petri dish, if you will...the ovum (fertilized egg) is then incubated for a time, and ultimately, inserted into the uterus. The means of obtaining the sperm is via unnatural process, the means of united the sperm to the egg is via an unnatural process, and the means of the ovum implanting in the mother's womb is an unnatural process. Even if one is using a condom with holes in it, one is engaging in a barrier method, in order to keep some seminal fluid from entering the woman's body. I cannot see how that can be entirely "moral." CMom, are you certain that the Church approves of this procedure? Pax Christi. <>< Edited November 5, 2003 by Anna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted November 5, 2003 Share Posted November 5, 2003 Simply, YES. and to elaborate on that a bit. God's plan is different for every couple. If THEY want to have a baby but He doesn't, then sure, they have free will. But the Church teaches that our will should be in line with His. When our will is against his, then that is a sin (i.e. detrimental to our relationship with him / bad for our souls / bad for our body's / bad for society). If a husband and wife are trying to have a baby, and it was God's will that they do, then there will be a baby brought into the world in the exact way God intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted November 6, 2003 Share Posted November 6, 2003 I suppose this is just a touchy subject for me. I have Spina Bifida. 'Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now