• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

IVF in the news

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
13,494
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
non-practicing agnostic
Two recent stories in the news about IVF...considering after what happened in Alabama, it's getting "interesting" and by interesting, I mean fascist.

www.nbcnews.com

Senate Republicans block Democratic bill to establish nationwide IVF protections

It's part of a push by Democrats to highlight the electoral contrast over reproductive rights. Before the vote, GOP senators said they favor legal IVF but prefer a narrower bill.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

Introduced by Sens. Patty Murray, D-Wash., Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., it would establish a federal right for individuals to access IVF-assisted reproductive technology services, for providers to offer the procedure and for insurers to cover it. Those rights could not be hindered by states.

At the heart of the tension is a belief among many social conservatives that life begins at conception. If written into law, that could mean that embryos discarded as part of the IVF process — a common occurrence — are treated as murder or manslaughter. Many Republicans, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., have signed on to legislation that would give a fertilized egg the rights of a person.
Click to expand...

newrepublic.com

Southern Baptists’ Vote on IVF Is Terrifying Sign of What’s to Come

The anti-IVF movement is not a fringe idea on the right anymore.
newrepublic.com newrepublic.com

The Southern Baptist Convention voted Wednesday to oppose in vitro fertilization, signaling a dangerous shift in conservative stances on the procedure.

The move by the country’s largest and most powerful Protestant denomination, passed by 11,000 “messengers” at its annual convention, declared that IVF “most often participates in the destruction of embryonic human life” and calls on the denomination to “only utilize reproductive technologies” taking into account “the unconditional value and right to life of every human being.”
Click to expand...
 

“It’s going to be a long process. It took us 50 years to take down Roe,” said Brent Leatherwood, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm of the SBC. “It may take us a similarly long time frame to get people to a place where they are thinking more deeply about something like this. It’s okay. It takes time. We have to be patient.”
Click to expand...

I am not sure it will take 50 years as I think that it may take WAY LESS to change the game such as banning more than one embryo at once or banning freezing or similar things.
 
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:

“It’s going to be a long process. It took us 50 years to take down Roe,” said Brent Leatherwood, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm of the SBC. “It may take us a similarly long time frame to get people to a place where they are thinking more deeply about something like this. It’s okay. It takes time. We have to be patient.”
Click to expand...

I am not sure it will take 50 years as I think that it may take WAY LESS to change the game such as banning more than one embryo at once or banning freezing or similar things.
Click to expand...
I mean, it makes some sense why they are doing this: if legal personhood begins at conception, then fetuses are tax write-offs. They realize there's an insane legal outcome attached to frozen embryos in the presence of the laws they're using to enslave women, and this is the only way to get ahead of that
 
Jarhyn said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:

“It’s going to be a long process. It took us 50 years to take down Roe,” said Brent Leatherwood, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm of the SBC. “It may take us a similarly long time frame to get people to a place where they are thinking more deeply about something like this. It’s okay. It takes time. We have to be patient.”
Click to expand...

I am not sure it will take 50 years as I think that it may take WAY LESS to change the game such as banning more than one embryo at once or banning freezing or similar things.
Click to expand...
I mean, it makes some sense why they are doing this: if legal personhood begins at conception, then fetuses are tax write-offs. They realize there's an insane legal outcome attached to frozen embryos in the presence of the laws they're using to enslave women, and this is the only way to get ahead of that
Click to expand...
If personhood begins at conception are identical twins half a person? And are chimeras two people?
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Jarhyn said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:

“It’s going to be a long process. It took us 50 years to take down Roe,” said Brent Leatherwood, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy arm of the SBC. “It may take us a similarly long time frame to get people to a place where they are thinking more deeply about something like this. It’s okay. It takes time. We have to be patient.”
Click to expand...

I am not sure it will take 50 years as I think that it may take WAY LESS to change the game such as banning more than one embryo at once or banning freezing or similar things.
Click to expand...
I mean, it makes some sense why they are doing this: if legal personhood begins at conception, then fetuses are tax write-offs. They realize there's an insane legal outcome attached to frozen embryos in the presence of the laws they're using to enslave women, and this is the only way to get ahead of that
Click to expand...
If personhood begins at conception are identical twins half a person? And are chimeras two people?
Click to expand...

The survivor should be charged with murder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom