The unethical practice of designing babies

[dotterofzion]

Helen, is the biblical reference to 'The breath of life' and the fact that God breathed life into Adam not enough proof that life does not start in the blood?
'In the beginning was the word...' not the blood
Biblically facts show that life does not start in the blood
''In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God(Jn 1 vs. 1) is God not alive?
'In Him was life...' (Jn 1 vs. 4) If God is Spirit and not flesh how can He have life(which is supposed to exist in the blood alone)?
'And without Him was nothing made' (Jn 1 vs. 3)
How can He create life if He is not living? And how can He be living if He does not have blood(which you suggest is where life begins)?
'And the word was made flesh and dwelt among us' (Jn.1 vs. 14) 
It is a fact Christ had life before he was transformed inti flesh., and He lives despite His on despite His physical death.
Biblical evidence shows that life was created by God, and existed before the creation of man. Hence it can and does exist without blood.
God is the creator of life and life can exist without blood.

[Helen]

1.  We are talking about human beings/physical life
2.  If you are going to depend on breath to show life, then any baby up to about six months gestation can be conveniently killed because it is not yet alive; in fact no baby in the womb breathes.

I don't think you are understanding my question at all.

[highlyfavored]

Does not the embryo become a human being? If so what justification do we have to regard it as less than a human life?
     Can anyone show me a human being who did not once exist as an embryo? anyone?
If all human beings existed as embryos at some point, then how can we justify discarding unused embryos as in the case of IVF? Aren't we playing God when we create what could have become a human being?  and discard it when we consider it unuseful?
Does it matter if the embryo can breath, or has life? shouldn't the fact that it can potentially become a human being superceed the argument of whether the embryo is living or not? How can a christian justify discarding a potential life, as though it is not capable of becoming a human being?
As long as an embryo can become a human being, where is the justification in threating it as though it is nothing(useless) if each of the discarded embryo was given the right environment to ensure it's developement wouldn't each of them become a human? How then can we as christians know that the embryo can become a human being and still justify the fact that a few of them are thrown away as a result a medical process?
            Are you not aware that science has even developed this process further and people can now choose the gender, phyisical attributes and other features of their unborn child? what happens in a case where an embryo for instance is an undesired gender? A human being that could have existed would be denied the right to exist because he or she is the wrong gender, where is the justification in this?

[chosenone]

It is estimated that 5 million babies have been born using IVF. How sad to think that those 5 million would have had no life, if it wasn't for this small procedure that enables couples to have their own baby.

[highlyfavored]

Chosenone, you say five million babies have been born due to IVF, have you counted the other millions(discarded embryos) who could have been born too?
        Why create an embryo and not use it? Why create a potential human being and not allow it to become one? Helping a couple conceive does not justify discarding unused embryos, what is ethical about discarding a potential human life in order to please a couple who can still experience the joy of being a parent by adopting or fostering children.
       

[Catholica]

It is estimated that 5 million babies have been born using IVF. How sad to think that those 5 million would have had no life, if it wasn't for this small procedure that enables couples to have their own baby.

Where did you get your "5 million" statistic?  It is possible, I suppose, when you consider things globally.

Some statistics were released from the UK last year, and this is interesting for statistical purposes.

http://www.jillstanek.com/2013/01/uk-ivf-embryos-being-discarded-at-industrial-rate/ (written at the end of 2012)
-----
Since August 1991 more than 3.5 million human embryos have been created, producing only 235,480 "gestational sacs" or evidence of successful implantation. Of the embryos created, almost 840,000 were put into storage for future use and more than 2000 were stored for donation. Almost 5,900 were set aside for scientific research.

Almost 1.4 million embryos were implanted in the hope of beginning pregnancies, with fewer than one in six resulting in a pregnancy.

Nearly 1.7 million were discarded unused and a further 23,480 were discarded after being taken out of storage....
-----

Statistics were not kept before 1991, and are probably pretty low.  That means, as a result of IVF in the UK:

Approximately 236,000 were successfully implanted due to IVF.  Let's assume that the birth rate from that point is fairly high 100% for our example.
Approximately 1,167,000 never implanted,
Almost 840,000 were put into storage for future use,
About 2000 were stored for donation,
Almost 5900 have been or are scheduled to be murdered for science.
Nearly 1,700,000 have been murdered because they were not needed.

Of the 840,000 put into storage, almost all of those will likely be murdered as well.

That means for 236,000 born, 2.54 million have been or will be murdered.  We have to count ones that did not take as the natural result of the process.  That is up to God.

So effectively the born -> murdered rate is only 8.5 % born, 91.5 % murdered.

If that rate is typical of the IVF process, which it probably is, that means if 5 million were born, approximately 53 million have been murdered.

And similarly, many, many more babies have been born from a conception resulting from rape.  In 1998 alone, 25000 babies were born from that horrible act.  By extrapolation, since rape is older than IVF, the numbers born from rape far outnumber those born from IVF.  Yet that doesn't change the fact that rape is evil.  It is time to start recognizing that IVF is evil as well.

[chosenone]

It is estimated that 5 million babies have been born using IVF. How sad to think that those 5 million would have had no life, if it wasn't for this small procedure that enables couples to have their own baby.

Where did you get your "5 million" statistic?  It is possible, I suppose, when you consider things globally.

Some statistics were released from the UK last year, and this is interesting for statistical purposes.

http://www.jillstanek.com/2013/01/uk-ivf-embryos-being-discarded-at-industrial-rate/ (written at the end of 2012)
-----
Since August 1991 more than 3.5 million human embryos have been created, producing only 235,480 "gestational sacs" or evidence of successful implantation. Of the embryos created, almost 840,000 were put into storage for future use and more than 2000 were stored for donation. Almost 5,900 were set aside for scientific research.

Almost 1.4 million embryos were implanted in the hope of beginning pregnancies, with fewer than one in six resulting in a pregnancy.

Nearly 1.7 million were discarded unused and a further 23,480 were discarded after being taken out of storage....
-----

Statistics were not kept before 1991, and are probably pretty low.  That means, as a result of IVF in the UK:

Approximately 236,000 were successfully implanted due to IVF.  Let's assume that the birth rate from that point is fairly high 100% for our example.
Approximately 1,167,000 never implanted,
Almost 840,000 were put into storage for future use,
About 2000 were stored for donation,
Almost 5900 have been or are scheduled to be murdered for science.
Nearly 1,700,000 have been murdered because they were not needed.

Of the 840,000 put into storage, almost all of those will likely be murdered as well.

That means for 236,000 born, 2.54 million have been or will be murdered.  We have to count ones that did not take as the natural result of the process.  That is up to God.

So effectively the born -> murdered rate is only 8.5 % born, 91.5 % murdered.

If that rate is typical of the IVF process, which it probably is, that means if 5 million were born, approximately 53 million have been murdered.

And similarly, many, many more babies have been born from a conception resulting from rape.  In 1998 alone, 25000 babies were born from that horrible act.  By extrapolation, since rape is older than IVF, the numbers born from rape far outnumber those born from IVF.  Yet that doesn't change the fact that rape is evil.  It is time to start recognizing that IVF is evil as well.

I did some research on the internet. That is a world wide figure.

Most babies conceived through rape are aborted I would have thought.

How can the husbands sperm and the wife's egg being fertilised be evil? its what happens in the womb happening outside the womb and then put back. That's the only difference.
The fact that some misuse this, doesn't take away from the fact that if done properly its not evil. 

  Had I  not been able to have children without this bit of help, I would not have hesitated to go down that route after praying about it. God has seen fit to bless many believers with children conceived this way.
As long as it was my eggs and my husbands sperm, then I cant see the problem. I would have asked them to only try and fertilise two eggs, and had them both put back. If there had been more then I would have used them for a second child.  Billions of tiny fertilised embryos are lost daily a short time after sex because they never implant in the womb. Its what happens. Only a tiny tiny percentage of eggs fertilised ever implant and grow into babies. Does that mean we shouldn't have sex because babies are being lost this way?

[chosenone]

Chosenone, you say five million babies have been born due to IVF, have you counted the other millions(discarded embryos) who could have been born too?
        Why create an embryo and not use it? Why create a potential human being and not allow it to become one? Helping a couple conceive does not justify discarding unused embryos, what is ethical about discarding a potential human life in order to please a couple who can still experience the joy of being a parent by adopting or fostering children.
       

If there were enough available babies and small children for adoption, then far fewer would go this route I am sure. In the west its almost impossible to adopt a baby or small child. I know people who have tried.
If I had IVF I would have made sure that only a couple of eggs were fertilised, and that both were replaced.

[highlyfavored]

It is not impossible to adopt a baby or small child, westerners are adopting babies, mostly internationally. Many orphanages in countries like Romania, Columbia, Asia, India, and Africa allow international adoption. Fostering chlldren and babies is still being practised in the West.
             In a process that involves a 20 to 25 percent success rate even after many eggs are fertilized and many embryos are cultivated, is it not logical to say that insisting on fertilizing only a couple of eggs(less than the recommended number) will be an almost futile attempt to achieving a pregnancy? In IVF, the more embryos that are created, the more likely it is for the best ones to be choosen and for the woman to achieve pregnancy.
           In IVF doctors choose which embryo is to be born, and which embryo is to be denied birth. Does he have the authority to do this? Morally, has he been given this authority by God? Ethically which of us is better than the other? As christians the Bible tells us that the creation of human beings is an exclusive domain of God and not scientists no matter how well meaning they may seem.
           It is true that IVF babies are human beings and we must love them, but so are rape babies, children born out of wedlock and babies born out of incests, do we deny them love? but are these acts lawful? are these acts right?
            Is it moral to keep a potential human being frozen until when needed? Is any embryo frozen in it's mother's womb? What is the justification in discarding these embryos when they are not needed? Is not the embryo a potential human being? Thus we can assume that creation of human embryos during the IVF process is a systematic creation of potential human beings knowing that some would die. Statistics show that each embryo created has a 99% chance of dying, still think nothing is wrong?
               Do you know that IVF was founded on dishonest logic?
In 1978, the first test tube baby survived. The number of embryos(potential human beings) sacrificed to achieve this, is countless. After Pope John Paull II said it was immoral, the Chief scientisi Edwards gave an interview where he said
        " I wanted to find out exactly who was in charge, whether it was God himself or whether it was scientists in the laboratory- It was us! The Pope looked stupid..., it was fantastic achievement, but it was about more than fertility. It was about issues like stem cells and the ethics of human conception"

Dr. Peter Brinsden, Edwards successor at the Cambridge clinic he founded predicts "In a few years, assisted conception will have almost become the norm. This is because screening techniques will have improved to such an extent that parents can make their children free of even minor defects"

What is morally right about this statements?
Human beings need to be treated with dignity? Potential human life too, who is accounting for the millions of potential life sacrificed to make a couple happy? I am not playing jugde, i am only asking, do those embryo not matter? Could they not have been you or me? Didn't we all begin as embryos? aren't we all human beings today? Is there any morality in throwing away even one embryo? even one potential human life?

[JohnDB]

It is not impossible to adopt a baby or small child, westerners are adopting babies, mostly internationally. Many orphanages in countries like Romania, Columbia, Asia, India, and Africa allow international adoption. Fostering chlldren and babies is still being practised in the West.
             In a process that involves a 20 to 25 percent success rate even after many eggs are fertilized and many embryos are cultivated, is it not logical to say that insisting on fertilizing only a couple of eggs(less than the recommended number) will be an almost futile attempt to achieving a pregnancy? In IVF, the more embryos that are created, the more likely it is for the best ones to be choosen and for the woman to achieve pregnancy.
           In IVF doctors choose which embryo is to be born, and which embryo is to be denied birth. Does he have the authority to do this? Morally, has he been given this authority by God? Ethically which of us is better than the other? As christians the Bible tells us that the creation of human beings is an exclusive domain of God and not scientists no matter how well meaning they may seem.
           It is true that IVF babies are human beings and we must love them, but so are rape babies, children born out of wedlock and babies born out of incests, do we deny them love? but are these acts lawful? are these acts right?
            Is it moral to keep a potential human being frozen until when needed? Is any embryo frozen in it's mother's womb? What is the justification in discarding these embryos when they are not needed? Is not the embryo a potential human being? Thus we can assume that creation of human embryos during the IVF process is a systematic creation of potential human beings knowing that some would die. Statics show that each embryo created has a 99% chance of dying, still think nothing is wrong?
               Do you know that IVF was founded on dishonest logic?
In 198, the first test tube baby survived. The number of embryos(potential human beings) sacrificed to achieve this, is countless. After Pope John Paull II said it was immoral, the Chief scientisi Edwards gave an interview where he said
        " I wanted to find out exactly who was in charge, whether it was God himself or whether it was scientists in the laboratory- It was us! The Pope looked stupid..., it was fantastic achievement, but it was about more than fertility. It was about issues like stem cells and the ethics of human conception"

Dr. Peter Brinsden, Edwards successor at the Cambridge clinic he founded predicts "In a few years, assisted conception will have almost become the norm. This is because screening techniques will have improved to such an extent that parents can make their children free of even minor defects"

What is morally right about this statements?
Human beings need to be treated with dignity? Potential human life too, who is accounting for the millions of potential life sacrificed to make a couple happy? I am not playing jugde, i am only asking, do those embryo not matter? Could they not have been you or me? Didn't we all begin as embryos? aren't we all human beings today? Is there any morality in throwing away even one embryo? even one potential human life?

Nice post