Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion.

IVF is much more insidious than abortion because it pretends to be about life, but in doing; achieves the wholesale slaughter of the unwanted.

What is your perspective on married couples who implant every embryo they created and don't destroy any?

The question of embryos is an important one.

Yes, lots of families have been helped by IVF. I have friends who suffered infertility but have children because of it.

But there are also embryos created that are not used that are later destroyed. This is not just ones implanted that do not result in pregnancy. That happens in natural childbirth. These are viable embryos, frozen, and later the couple decide to not use them. They are typically destroyed.

If you support IVF, you must know that it does result in the intentional destruction of embryos.

IVF also often times includes preimplantation genetic testing to determine viable embryos. That test can also be used to determine desired embryos. Don't want a girl or down syndrome? IVF can assure your desired child is chosen.

IVF is an amazing thing that has some highly ethical consequences that result in degrading the value of humans.

Scotts Tot said:

---

What is your perspective on married couples who implant every embryo they created and don't destroy any?

---

There's no way to do IVF that
A. Is not violative of the dignity of the human person
B. Doesn't separate procreation from the procreative act

We shouldn't create people in laboratories.

We had our two girls through IVF. I have since developed major ethical concerns with the practice, and while I do believe there may be appropriate ways to do it, our case certainly was not one of them.

Even still, God was incredibly gracious and merciful to us in those years. It has become a defining period of my life in that looking back, I'm not sure His love and providential care has ever been more evident than it was in the midst of my rebellion. He is good.

Love that take

10andBOUNCE said:

---

Love that take

---

Agree. And it seems like when I was most rebellious in my younger days, just like you stated, God still showed me mercy and grace.

My views have also changed quite a bit even over the last 1-2 years. Believing and living into our Christian duty to take care of widows and orphans.

10andBOUNCE said:

---

My views have also changed quite a bit even over the last 1-2 years. Believing and living into our Christian duty to take care of widows and orphans.

---

I was fortunate to be able to take care of my widowed mother for over 20 years after my dad went to be with the Lord.

And I have for years had a small list of widows from my old church that I call and check on periodically. Makes me feel good.

Strongly suggest it.

Mostly Peaceful said:

---

We had our two girls through IVF. I have since developed major ethical concerns with the practice, and while I do believe there may be appropriate ways to do it, our case certainly was not one of them.

Even still, God was incredibly gracious and merciful to us in those years. It has become a defining period of my life in that looking back, I'm not sure His love and providential care has ever been more evident than it was in the midst of my rebellion. He is good.

---

Regardless of the ethics of IVF, your kids are obviously gifts from God.

What I believe strongly is that the Catholic Church has been miserably inept in articulating our position on IVF. Sadly it is only a "repeat" as pertains to abortion. We have failed to articulate the Church's position and understanding of what this form of fertilization entails. I truly believe that it takes much discernment and commitment to help the world understand what IVF is. We as workers in the Lord's vineyard are called to educate the world/political world to the aspects that are involved in this procedure and how it impacts everyone involved. Our Lord depends on us to tell and educate the world, not the politicians.

I find it impossible for anyone to make a decision of this great importance without sufficient knowledge of all that decision entails. There are so many ways to parenthood (adoption and Spiritual surrogation to name two). I pray for all concerned.

Wyoming Aggie said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion.

IVF is much more insidious than abortion because it pretends to be about life, but in doing; achieves the wholesale slaughter of the unwanted.

---

Catholic here and my wife and I are about to start IVF treatments in our early 40's. Can't wait. And I'll definitely still receive the Eucharist.

---

https://naprotechnology.com/

Recommend you check this out first and see about root cause solutions rather than the band-aid.

Scotts Tot said:

---

Bob Lee said:

---

Scotts Tot said:

---

What is your perspective on married couples who implant every embryo they created and don't destroy any?

---

There's no way to do IVF that
A. Is not violative of the dignity of the human person
B. Doesn't separate procreation from the procreative act

We shouldn't create people in laboratories.

---

What does this mean specifically with regard to IVF?

---

That people in the embryonic stage of development have a right their mother's uterus where they belong. Not in a petri dish or freezer or a medical waste bin. Even more basic than that, they have the right to be called into existence through an act of love between their biological mother and father. Not via technical procedure, and subjected to unknown number of possible human error that has resulted in women unwittingly giving birth to other parents' children, or men other than their husband's children. How many people are raising other people's biological children who think they're their own offspring? Usually they only find out if a white family has an Asian baby or something.

Wyoming Aggie said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion.

IVF is much more insidious than abortion because it pretends to be about life, but in doing; achieves the wholesale slaughter of the unwanted.

---

Catholic here and my wife and I are about to start IVF treatments in our early 40's. Can't wait. And I'll definitely still receive the Eucharist.

---

Why? I don't understand this mindset. The church says "this is a moral evil", but you say "not only are we going to do this happily, we'll keep taking the Eucharist and we don't care what you say"?

Wyoming Aggie said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion.

IVF is much more insidious than abortion because it pretends to be about life, but in doing; achieves the wholesale slaughter of the unwanted.

---

Catholic here and my wife and I are about to start IVF treatments in our early 40's. Can't wait. And I'll definitely still receive the Eucharist.

---

You're obviously free to make your own decision, but I'd strongly recommend talking with catholics and protestants alike who might take exception, and doing so with an open mind. Beyond the ethical concerns, the process can itself can be extremely taxing both physically and mentally. It's no picnic for sure.

PabloSerna said:

---

"Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion."

Only because you wrote it-

Is it your position that Jesus came for the righteous only?

---

What kind of question is this? It makes no sense. He's saying they need to repent so they can be brought back into communion with Christ's church. That's the opposite of "Jesus came for the righteous only."

PabloSerna said:

---

"Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion."

Only because you wrote it-

Is it your position that Jesus came for the righteous only?

---

How did you get there from here? Let's just cut to the point with out any games. Does our church teach that IVF is a grave sin? Are we supposed to receive the Eucharist in a state of grave sin?

Have you even looked into the Church's reasons against IVF or are you just ignoring them?

Wyoming Aggie said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Wyoming Aggie said:

---

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Need to have their ability to receive the Eucharist rescinded pending spiritual direction, absolution and conversion.

IVF is much more insidious than abortion because it pretends to be about life, but in doing; achieves the wholesale slaughter of the unwanted.

---

Catholic here and my wife and I are about to start IVF treatments in our early 40's. Can't wait. And I'll definitely still receive the Eucharist.

---

Why? I don't understand this mindset. The church says "this is a moral evil", but you say "not only are we going to do this happily, we'll keep taking the Eucharist and we don't care what you say"?

---

I don't understand your mindset. Wanting to rescind my ability to receive the eucharist because my wife and I are trying to bring a new life into the world.

Do you people listen to yourselves? Get off your moral high horse. And you wonder why people are leaving the church in droves.

---

You're taking this personally. There's a difference between sinning privately, and public figures bringing scandal to the Church, which is specifically what he's posting about. Unless you're a Republican politician advocating for laws that will make IVF more accessible and pervasive, the post wasn't about you.

People embracing the culture is a tale as old as time. I don't spend time wondering why people leave the Church. I already know.