An article in the news (sorry I didn't grab a link) reported that states which ban abortions will also likely ban in-vitro fertilization. The procedure, widely used by couples unable to conceive, involves fertilizing multiple eggs in hopes that one is viable. Unviable fertilized eggs are then destroyed. Since states banning abortions generally define life as beginning at conception or when the sperm joins with the egg, those eggs could not be destroyed or left to perish. So in those states, IVF procedures would likely end immediately.

---

“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias

Well, by their logic it obviously should be.

But the dirty little secret is that it seems they are willing to make an exception, or at least they have in the past, because these women (or their husbands) are desperate to conceive. And generally, to these folks, more (white) babies are good. So the little inconsistency of “murdering” unused fertilized zygotes (or leaving them frozen indefinitely) in the process of IVF is ignored.

It’ll be interesting to see. I would guess that you’d have some hard-line dogmatic zealots who think such infertility is God’s punishment for something anyway, and will want to outlaw IVF. But I think that there would be more conservative couples with infertility problems that will feel that being anti-abortion should not apply to their situation. My sense is that they will win out - the limitations they want to impose are meant for other women.

I see no reason for logical consistency.

---

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)

Meanwhile, GOP experts gather to discuss felines' healthcare:





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2022 12:41PM by pdq.

"generally define life as beginning at conception or when the sperm joins with the egg"

thank doG for religion.

---

!#$@@$#!

Quote
Ombligo
states which ban abortions will also likely ban in-vitro fertilization.

So I've already asked why there is no funding for artificial wombs...

Now I'm going to ask why some charlatan "scientific revolutionary" doesn't just produce some sort of homeopathic water to "bless" these in vitro zygotes so that ensoulment is prevented.

Takes away 99% of the religious nutjobs argument, and since they can't prove a collection of protoplasm has a soul - they can't disprove the efficacy of of "unsoulbaby" water.

After all most of the "pro life" folks are mostly fine with murdering all kinds of other life - just not the special souls they believe we humans have.

Unsoulbaby water could also be used to allow later term abortions. Maybe baptising the unborn with it simply sends the unborn soul back to the ether to find another body to manifest in, eliminating the nonviable fetus' "living" status as a concern.

---

g=



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2022 03:17PM by gabester.

Yeah that'll be interesting to see how anti choice legislators dance around that one.

In some states with "trigger laws," legal personhood is granted to the fetus, which would make IVF murder, just as abortion becomes murder. Same for some types of contraception.

2% of Amerocan babies are the result of IVF and that number grows each year as the technology improves and older women, single women and same sex couples seek to have babies.

Heard some conservative Catholic radio this morning and they were railing against IVF, saying it is sin, not what God intends, leads women to commit murder, etc.
So yeah, they are ready for phase 2, or 3.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/09/2022 12:33PM by Lemon Drop.