I'm wondering if Pro-Life Christians only consider it murder if the embryo is inside the uterus.
For example, suppose a woman has her fertilized embryo frozen. Would you consider it murder if she later changes her mind and chooses not to have the embryo implanted? (Assume that if she doesn't carry the fertilized embryo, it is not destroyed, but rather left to survive on its own, which it won't.)
2007-11-21 06:24:27 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
An embryo was never meant to be outside the womb.....
It's still murder.
We can't skate around these things..........human life cannot be tampered with like this.
2007-11-21 06:26:33 · answer #1 · answered by primoa1970 7 · 4⤊ 6⤋
I am very much against abortion but this is for embryos that are INSIDE the womb. Embroys in a lab are not been implanted in the womb and in my opinion are not yet living. So you just can not put this in the same category as abortion which I think IS murder.
Did any of you people know that many of the embroys that die in IVF are actually needed but simply just do not make it? If they die naturally - is this murder? Baring in mind that even if these embroys had been conceived naturally they still would have died!
Do you people believe that people that have natural miscarriage's have murdered their baby for failing to provide the necessities of life?
And by the way - I hope that those of you who said IVF is unnatural and shouldn't be used NEVER have to go through it - I really do.
2007-11-21 06:46:30 · answer #2 · answered by fijibabie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can't speak for everyone of course but my objection arises from the external fertilization in the first place. We are setting up the death of the embryo by placing it in an inhospitable environment. Had only a single embryo been fertilized and then implanted then I would have less objection. After all, it was the solution that Abraham sought of his own power that rather than relying on God's promised blessing that caused the problems with Hagar. Are our technological methods really all that different?
2007-11-21 06:32:07 · answer #3 · answered by gilliamichael 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I...don't see how it could ever be a mandatory thing...I understand if a woman is having trouble with fertility herself, or if she's being a surrogate. But I can't think of any reason the "draft" women to have babies. We've got population problems as it is.
2016-05-24 22:06:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think people should be required to implant all embryos they create within a reasonable period of time.
2007-11-21 06:29:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
"An embryo was never meant to be outside the womb... it's still murder." -- Primoa
Um, HELLO... ever heard of ectopic pregnancies? They are OUTSIDE THE WOMB and they happen naturally, usually killing the embryo and the mother.
I really hate stupid Christians. They are more than willing to kill "heathens" (insert here "Iraq War") but then scream PRO-LIFE about keeping embryos and fetuses alive regardless of what it does to the mother.
What the hell is wrong with people?
2007-11-21 06:34:50 · answer #6 · answered by Quaoar Rocks! 5 · 6⤊ 4⤋
Yes
2007-11-21 06:27:22 · answer #7 · answered by ? 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
You are correct. I would consider it to be a human dying. I am not saying the mother would be guilty of murder, though.
I am patently against that type of fertility process.
How is this a brilliant point?
2007-11-21 06:28:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
It doesn't matter where the embryo is. Letting it die is murder through neglect.
Although it would be murder by the doctor who leaves it to die, not by the mother.
2007-11-21 06:29:11 · answer #9 · answered by Felicity 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
If you are a firefighter and can only save a secretary or a tray of frozen embryos, which do you save?
2007-11-21 06:27:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋