Why Is IVF Suddenly Bad?

49,286 Views | 824 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by TexasAggie_97
Serviam
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wtmartinaggie said:

you said ivf was payment for services vs. church donations being discretionary.

i said that seems irrelevant.

you said no.

i said okay let's compare 'pay for something in return' payments ivf vs. catholics and suggest you bring your checkbook.

you say, i dont understand.

i say, open a history book


I haven't said any of those things, but I still don't understand why you think charity is the same as paying for a good or service
wtmartinaggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm saying that IVF is always a service. Catholicism isn't always a charity.






We're way off topic here, but the point is that while I support you voting the way you want, I think you should leave people alone for doing what they think is right. There are enough things in this this world that are verifiably corrupt for us all to agree on going after. Leave loving people trying to pay their hard-earned money to bring a kid into this world out of it. I can't believe we're even arguing it honestly.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's natural for you to associate teachings of your faith with objective morality. But they are not (at least necessarily you can go to the other board to play that out) the same.
Serviam
How long do you want to ignore this user?
wtmartinaggie said:

I'm saying that IVF is always a service. Catholicism isn't always a charity.


Ok. I just don't know what that proves. I feel like you're trying to make some sort of Randian point about the virtue inherent in free exchange, but I can't grasp it.
wtmartinaggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Check my last post. maybe that helps.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

It's natural for you to associate teachings of your faith with objective morality. But they are not (at least necessarily you can go to the other board to play that out) the same.


Bold to imply, if not outright state, the church teaches things that are immoral.

Actually I could see how a moral relativist would think that.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Or you know, the majority of people who've ever lived who aren't members of your church.

Not to mention the overwhelming majority of your own members who don't agree with your church on contraception.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

Or you know, the majority of people who've ever lived who aren't members of your church.

Not to mention the overwhelming majority of your own members who don't agree with your church on contraception.


Again, what people think and do does not change objective morality. I know you don't believe that, but it's still true.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yea its still your opinion. And its still embarrassing to call it "bold" to disagree.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

Yea its still your opinion. And its still embarrassing to call it "bold" to disagree.


I didn't say it was bold to disagree. I'm aware that you disagree with objective morality. Though I guess that is pretty bold.

I said it was bold for you to say the church teaches immoral things. It doesn't.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's really not bold. Do you actually believe that every non catholic fully believes the moral teachings of the church?

Do you think people, or do you yourself believe it's moral to place prohibition on things that aren't immoral. Or to require things which are not required. Or to fail to require things other believe required?

What a weird position to take.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

It's really not bold. Do you actually believe that every non catholic fully believes the moral teachings of the church?

Do you think people, or do you yourself believe it's moral to place prohibition on things that aren't immoral. Or to require things which are not required. Or to fail to require things other believe required?

What a weird position to take.

I think the issue is you're conflating homogeneity with objectivity?
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bob Lee said:

Aggrad08 said:

It's really not bold. Do you actually believe that every non catholic fully believes the moral teachings of the church?

Do you think people, or do you yourself believe it's moral to place prohibition on things that aren't immoral. Or to require things which are not required. Or to fail to require things other believe required?

What a weird position to take.

I think the issue is you're conflating homogeneity with objectivity?


I don't think he's conflating, I think he doesn't think words have meaning because everything is subjective to him.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Im not I'm very familiar with the topic and the arguments.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

Im not I'm very familiar with the topic and the arguments.

Why should we need to think non-Catholics believe the Church's teachings? That doesn't make sense to me.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I made that comment in response to the laughable notion that it was "bold" to think the church taught anything immoral. Not to anything you said.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

I made that comment in response to the laughable notion that it was "bold" to think the church taught anything immoral. Not to anything you said.

He said it's bold to make a positive claim that Church teaching is immoral. But more than that it doesn't make sense from a moral relativist. It's incoherent.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bob Lee said:

Aggrad08 said:

I made that comment in response to the laughable notion that it was "bold" to think the church taught anything immoral. Not to anything you said.

He said it's bold to make a positive claim that Church teaching is immoral. But more than that it doesn't make sense from a moral relativist. It's incoherent.


It's the problem with moral relativism and postmodernism in general. They say there is no truth or morality but that in itself is a truth and morality claim.

Luckily for him he can't be disproven because everything is subjective to him.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's still ridiculous and shows a complete inability to see the world from another perspective.

Imagine making that statement about another religion.

According to Jews and Muslims your teachings on a triune god are blasphemy…

Seriously how can you not put yourself in a non Catholics shoes.


And no it's not nonsensical from a moral relativist view either. That lowers all moral viewpoints to subjective it doesn't however eliminate moral viewpoints or positions.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yea the claim isn't that there is no truth. If you are going to play at being snarky and superior to defend your fragility at least get the basics right.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This has grown reasonably off topic.

I think we can wrap this up as sufficiently stated as nothing more than religious views being enforced.

If you actually want to discuss morality there is a different board for that. But please do read at least one old thread before starting a new one. It's been done before and the questions and arguments can be seen.
Old Army Ghost
How long do you want to ignore this user?
not murdering is only a religious belief?

you have no moral standing for anything if you cant even say that murder is bad
Old Army has gone to hell.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

This has grown reasonably off topic.

I think we can wrap this up as sufficiently stated as nothing more than religious views being enforced.

If you actually want to discuss morality there is a different board for that. But please do read at least one old thread before starting a new one. It's been done before and the questions and arguments can be seen.


This is great coming from you. You didn't even read this thread that you are all over now. And your summary of the thread was obviously wrong, because how could you know what the thread is about when you didn't read most of it.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Old Army Ghost said:

not murdering is only a religious belief?

you have no moral standing for anything if you cant even say that murder is bad


He didn't read the thread and he doesn't believe in objective morality.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's not what I wrote. I was pretty explicit so read again
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Your repeated inability to offer substance isn't me not reading the thread.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

That's not what I wrote. I was pretty explicit so read again


It actually is because you commented on the thread as a whole. But you didn't read the thread, so you didn't know what you were doing.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

Your repeated inability to offer substance isn't me not reading the thread.


I have nothing of substance to give you because you don't believe in objective substance. You want to see my thoughts, how about you read the thread for the first time…
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Your reading comprehension remains poor. He claims I said not murdering was only a religious belief. I neither said nor implied that. I was quite explicit with what I wrote and it's not particularly confusing so go re read if you need to.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
shack009 said:

Aggrad08 said:

Your repeated inability to offer substance isn't me not reading the thread.


I have nothing of substance to give you because you don't believe in objective substance. You want to see my thoughts, how about you read the thread for the first time…

Previous comment stands
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

Your reading comprehension remains poor. He claims I said not murdering was only a religious belief. I neither said nor implied that. I was quite explicit with what I wrote and it's not particularly confusing so go re read if you need to.


You said the thread could be summed up as religious views being enforced. Earlier in the thread, there was talk about how killing the IVF embryos is equivalent to murder. Thus, his response to you. Again proving you didn't read the thread.
Fitch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My nephew was born of IVF. The idgits who find malcontent and prejudice because it conflicts with their absolutism don't register on my radar. F 'em, and God help them find absolution and understanding.
shack009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fitch said:

My nephew was born of IVF. The idgits who find malcontent and prejudice because it conflicts with their absolutism don't register on my radar. F 'em, and God help them find absolution and understanding.


This is actually a pretty good summation of the thread. The pro IVF people don't even hear the anti arguments and use emotion rather than moral or scientific arguments. Then tell us we need to ask for absolution despite IVF being the immoral act done by the pro side.

Bravo, sir.
Bob Lee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fitch said:

My nephew was born of IVF. The idgits who find malcontent and prejudice because it conflicts with their absolutism don't register on my radar. F 'em, and God help them find absolution and understanding.

The existence of an immutable God suggests there ARE moral absolutes. You're the one who's prejudiced. Because your nephew was conceived through IVF. And the inability of people in your situation to steel man or give any deference to any moral argument against IVF is proof of that. "I/my friend/my family member did IVF. I love the kid who's a product of IVF. Eff 'em" is actually a pretty good synthesis of the entire argument in favor of IVF on this thread.
Serviam
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fitch said:

My nephew was born of IVF. The idgits who find malcontent and prejudice because it conflicts with their absolutism don't register on my radar. F 'em, and God help them find absolution and understanding.


I think it's great that you love your nephew, and I say this merely to show our point; what if he had been one of the ones they destroyed?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.