Enter your email address to receive updates by email:

subscribe in a reader like my facebook page follow me on twitter Image Map
Podcast Message Line: 512-222-3389
Logos Catholic Bible Software

« Marriage Questions Reader Roundup | Main | Once More Unto The Gate? »

January 09, 2007

Comments

Monica

But she's a Catholic Grandmother; doesn't that mean whatever she does must be OK?

bill912

By what definition of the term is Nancy Pelosi Catholic?

Mike Koenecke

I am minded of an old joke, where Notre Dame was playing SMU in a football game at SMU's stadium here in Dallas. Most were cheering for SMU, but none louder than a Catholic priest, wearing his collar. A bystander says, "Father, surely you know that SMU is a Methodist university, and Notre Dame is Catholic. Why are you cheering for SMU?" The priest replies, "First, suh, Ah am a Texan!"

First, sir, Pelosi (and Kerry, and Kennedy, ad nauseam) is a Democrat.

Dr. Eric

Once again, I am too disgusted to write anything.

Dr. Eric

I bet she gets Holy Communion every week too!

Barbara

I wonder how many of these "blue dog" Democrats that were elected, are going to cave to the leadership, or stand up and be counted for the platform that got them elected as so called moderates.

Josh Miller

But...but... she attends Mass every day!

David B.

If I see 'Ms.' Pelosi's stilted smile one more time on tv, I'll my put foot through the glass!!!!!!!!!

SDben5

pure evil. God help her.

David B.

"The king's good servant, but God's first!"


"Woe to you, brood of vipers."

Which of these quotes do you think applies to Ms.Pelosi?

Esau

This is the same Pelosi who was masking her liberal Northern California reputation/agenda by advertising herself as "Catholic", "Mother", etc., in the recent months just to avoid this notorious reputation of hers in the eyes of the public since now she is Speaker.

Talk about covering dunghill with snow!

Yeah, St. Pelosi, pray for us indeed!

Arieh

Will Bishop Wuerl have the courage to deny her Holy Communion and hold her accountable to Catholic teaching?

Curious

I'm so glad our Catholic bishops used Nancy's inauguration fest as a teaching moment and forbid celebratory masses for the event... oh, never mind.

Brian John Schuettler

Talk about covering dunghill with snow!

Heh, Luther wasn't a baby killer!

Esau

Heh, Luther wasn't a baby killer!

Yeah, I forgot how much of a hero he was to the point where so many innocent Catholics suffered and died at the hands of those he inspired and provoked to violence.

Patrick

>>Will Bishop Wuerl have the courage to deny her Holy Communion and hold her accountable to Catholic teaching?

Apparently not, she received communion publicly last week at a mass "for the children" at Trinity U, a catholic college. Archbishop Wuerl did not respond to pleas from pro-life groups to prevent this.


Arieh

Patrick,
My question was a bit rhetorical and sarcastic, as I already knew the answer.

Sorry to sound jaded, but it seems many of our bishops are either cowards or simply don't care.

bill912

I'd say it's the former, Arieh.

Dan Hunter

What do the bishops care about?

Scruffy

Apparently not the salvation of souls.

Curious

What do the bishops care about?


I guess vital issues with clear-cut answers like immigration policy and how to fix Iraq, judging from their concerns in the last year.

John E

Ms. Pelosi, Soylent Green is people!

caine

Right or wrong, denying communion is the bishop's (and by his authority, the priest's) call, not ours. They have the responsibility, and they will answer to God as shepherds.

Who among us would choose that role?

I agree that it is a scandal when pols like Kerry and Pelosi make a spectacle of the Mass, and it makes me as mad as anybody to see them go unchallenged. But as Paul says, they - or any of us - who recieve unworthily drinks their own death.

Do we wish hell on them?
Do we wish hell on the priests and bishops?

Of course not. And we can be sure that people who say decisions to do this or that are between them and God don't really consider the truth of that statement. In the end, they will.

But the clamour from segments of the laity that public sinners be denied the Eucharist frequently crosses over into self-righteousness There's a tangible desire for triumphal public vindication. What does that feed but our own pride?

There are a lot of things the bishops are responsible for where it's "open season"
for criticism from the laity. It is necessary and appropriate with things like the sex abuse scandals, and liturgical outrages. But who does or does not recieve Christ in the Eucharist is not something I feel comfortable, as laity, declaring.

bill912

"It is necessary and appropriate with things like the sex abuse scandals, and liturgical outrages."

Does "clamour from the laity" about "the sex abuse scandals, and liturgical outrages" "frequently cross...over into self-righteousness"?

Dr. Eric

"Who among us would choose that role?"

I would.

Dan Hunter

We are commanded by the holy father to never recieve the body,blood,soul and divinity of Jesus in the Eucharist if we are in moratal sin.
Abortion,support of abortion,murder,support of murder are mortal sins.
God bless you.

bill912

"Do we wish hell on them?"

I wish them to avoid hell. I want the bishops to have the spines to stand up and tell them that they are endangering their souls by their pro-abortion positions. It is not the responsibilty of the Church's ministers to make sure that we get to heaven; that's our responsibility. It *is* the responsibility of our bishops and priests to make sure that, if a member of their flock should one morning wake up in hell, he won't have to wonder how he got there.

Realist

For those who have new Representatives, most do not have e-mail addresses. Call them and get the e-mail address of one of their staff members then send him or her your views. See the example below:

Dear Representative ________,

As your employer, welcome to your new job representing our District.

My wife and I respect life from conception to passing and beyond. For that
reason, any legislation that does not respect life should be voted down. HR 3
to be discussed and voted on is such legislation. Stem cells from murdered
fetuses no matter their use, violates life. Vote it down. Just as a reminder,
you are up for re-election in two years.

Stem cells from amniotic fluid removed carefully on the other hand should be
supported with our tax dollars.

Dr. Eric

Realist,

Are you Pro-Life?

Are you against contraception, abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, embryonic stem cell research, etc...?

caine

It *is* the responsibility of our bishops and priests to make sure that, if a member of their flock should one morning wake up in hell, he won't have to wonder how he got there.

I agree.

Dr. Eric wants that job. Someone call the Vatican and nominate him. His house is in order and he's prepared to shephered souls!

John E

Here is the Senate Vote Summary for a similar bill earlier this year that passed, but was vetoed.

Notice anything "strange" about Nebraska?

Charlie

The Democratic party has learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from 12 years being out of power. The Blue Dog Democrats aren't even that influential.

I'm glad I left the Democratic party three years ago.

Esau

The Democratic party has learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from 12 years being out of power.

You mean the Dems were actually, at one time or another, in power??? No way!?!?!

Didn't Nancy Pelosi say, ‘We waited 200 years for this.'

Jared

Caine: You seem to be forgetting that denying these people Communion also sends a message to those who are not in public life but who hold similar views. When Kerry, Pelosi, et al receive Communion, the unknown abortion-supporting "Katholiks" in the pews are not sufficiently shaken up enough to rethink their murder-support. Alternatively, if Kerry, Pelosi, et al WERE to be denied Communion, some of these people just MIGHT be shocked into examining their pro-slaughter-of-the-innocent position.

Esau

...these people just MIGHT be shocked into examining their pro-slaughter-of-the-innocent position.

I'm glad Jared, unlike some folks out there, doesn't mince words and tells it like it is!

Instead, some would euphemistically call these heinous murders: Pro-Choice!

guess

Italy Off!

Thomas

Why, Nancy, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for California...

Chris

The people on here taunting those of us who think maybe we can apply clear Catholic teaching to a particular situation, are essentially saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," implying that we think we are without sin and therefore qualified to cast the stones. It's real cute to quote that line, and serves your position well because, hey, Jesus said it, so it's irrefutable. Well, I agree, what Jesus says is irrefutable.

Thing is, you have to take all of what He said. He said that line in quotes above, but then He turned to the woman caught in adultery and said, "Go and sin no more."

Mary Kay

Thomas - perfectly said :)

StubbleSpark

"Who among us would choose that role?"

I would too. If she came for communion with me, I'd check her into the plexiglas.

By the way, do know my parish would have plexiglas?

'Cause it would.

Jared

Stubblespark's version of the Crystal Cathedral has ... plesiglass?

Do I have to know how to ice-skate to go to your parish, Stubblespark?

Michael

Are you against contraception, abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, embryonic stem cell research, etc...?

What's extremely interesting, Dr. Eric, is that in vitro fertilization does not make it to your list of pro-life issues, or at least falls under "etc.", and yet it is not ESCR that is destroying embryoes; it is merely utilizing the embryos created for selfish sterile people who won't adopt and that would otherwise languish unused and be destroyed.

Furthermore, stopping this bill will not stop ESCR; it will only continue to prevent the federal government from funding it. It makes little sense to tie the hands of government and academic scientists while refusing to take a legitimate stand and outlaw for public and *private* scientists the use of ESCs.

Kasia

Whaddaya know, Realist and I agree on something. :-)

I already e-mailed my Congressman, but I'm not optimistic. I didn't bother to threaten his job - he's had it almost as long as I've been alive. I seriously doubt the voters of my district are going to change horses now, unless he pulls a Condit. (Even then, they might surprise me.) I just told him clearly what I think, and that I hope he'll oppose HR 3 and support the Alternative Pluripotent yadda yadda bill. (I said it much better when I wrote him, never fear.)

Kasia

I don't know that I agree with you, Michael. First off, I don't know that Dr. Eric is refusing to take a stand on private scientists; it's just that the bill we're currently facing doesn't address that.

I for one would LOVE to see ESCR be made illegal, just as I'd love to see abortion be made illegal except to save the mother. I also oppose IVF. However, I don't know that it "makes little sense to tie the hands of government and academic scientists" - first off, it's a first step. Second, it's a statement that taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund such a morally dubious venture.

Just because I can't have the whole pie right now, doesn't mean I won't take a slice.

Dr. Eric

For the record I forgot about in vitro fertilization. That too is an abomination!!!

As far as what to do with the millions of babies stuck in suspended animation, I don't know what the answer is. For sure they should not be experimented on like Mengele and his ilk would have us do.

I think that women being impregnated by them, like on a recent CSI episode, is a little ridiculous. I don't know what the Church's stance on this is except "We told you not to do it in the first place!"

Jamie Beu

BTW, have you seen this?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7584943275535423897>Stem Cell Quiz

Spread the word about this, so people know all the facts about what is and isn't being done with all variants of stem cells.

Juli

Pelosi and her ilk are causing scandal. Scandal, properly defined, means causing others to sin. If she can receive, all of our Catholic brothers and sisters who are not anti-abortion don't question their positions.

If she were denied Communion, or perhaps even excommunicated, it would help send a serious message. And of course, excommunication is not condenming someone to hell, but is a form of punishment meant to get the sinner back on the right path.

Even the use of our words are so contentious now.

Would I deny Communion to Pelosi, et al? Yes, easily, but more out of concern than "anger".

Jared

I'll be honest. Pelosi makes me angry. It makes me angry to see anyone rationalize and advocate the murder of the unborn.

To quote Ghost Rider: "Injustice makes me burn!"

Concern or anger, it makes no difference. This woman has no place in the Church until she repents of her evil.

David B.

Michael,

It is untrue that ESCR doesn't involve destroying embryos. Missouri Just passed an amendment to their state constitution allowing the destruction of embryos just for ESCR!!!!

John

But is she still not allowed to receive the Body of Christ as does Kerry, Cuomo , Ferraro and other liberal proponents of death because the USCCB actually can not come to grips and ban them?

Take a look around your church parking lot come '08 and see how many Democratic pro abortion bumper stickers you see, I for one saw more Kerry bumper stickers than Bush

As St Paul said in Scripture-Hold fast to Tradition and Faith and then one can see themself clearly from this mess

For the church to not publicly excommunicate these murderers is sinful and shows levels of corruption, much as the recent announcement of over 40 communist priests in Poland, from the Bishop recently appointed on down, with knowledge of JPII and B16 blowing the entire "Subito Santo" Communist fighter right out of the water

Esau

For the church to not publicly excommunicate these murderers is sinful and shows levels of corruption, much as the recent announcement of over 40 communist priests in Poland, from the Bishop recently appointed on down, with knowledge of JPII and B16 blowing the entire "Subito Santo" Communist fighter right out of the water

Everyone:

Ignore the hateful rants of the man who wrote this quote.

Please continue with the important discussion on Stem Cells. This is truly an significant issue that must be addressed. Don't be distracted into other topics by the boogeymen on the sidelines.

bill912

Don't sweat it, Esau; it's just a Hobby Horse out for a ride.

David B.

Trashing truths I know/
In my one horse hobby-sleigh/
O'er their feet we go/
Lying all the way./
Bill912's tailing me/
Making spirits bright/
Oh! what fun to rant and rave a sloppy song tonight!

')

David B.

Oops. Meant to say "Bill912 is t(R)ailing me."

Esau

TV NOTE: The TODAY SHOW will be showing Babies 'Playing' in the Womb this morning -- from the Intro, it appears that these clips may have come from the National Geographic Channel. More evidence for LIFE in the Womb!

caine

The people on here taunting those of us who think maybe we can apply clear Catholic teaching to a particular situation, are essentially saying, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," implying that we think we are without sin and therefore qualified to cast the stones.

I know Chris is not referring to me because I didn't say that. He must have read some invisible post using a secret decoder issued to level 5 JA cult members.

In fact, I was pretty specific in saying the decision to give or deny the Eucharist to a Catholic that presents him/herself to recieve belongs to the ordained. (This is another argument against lay Eucharistic ministers-extraordinaire, but that's another discussion.)

I was stating that the priest and bishop have responsibility of turning someone away if they KNOW they're unfit to recieve. Defiant public sinners certainly fit that bill - especially when they flaunt their rejection of basic truths, and use Mass attendance to publicly place their beliefs/actions over the Church and the faithful.

So, while I certainly think priest and bishops should take their shepherding role more seriously and prevent scandals of this kind, I don't know that an angry public demand to deny communion to a specific person is productive. I think it stems more from a desire for personal vindication - something that has been a deep hunger among many of us throughout the last 30 years of garbage in the US Church.

I know that if I saw video of Nancy Pelosi being turned away by Cardinal McCarrick, my initial reaction would be more like if the Bears won the Superbowl than some lofty appreciation of a pastoral attempt to bring her into true communion.

That wouldn't be a Christian reaction, and its not a good tendency to feed in one's heart or in the Church.

Esau

Caine,

You've provided several good points.

Please, don't confuse Chris as belonging to our JA Cult or any other fictitious cult for that matter.

He doesn't necessarily represent our (for that matter, my) view on the matter at hand, or anyone of those you suspect as part of the JA Cult, if there is even such a cult to begin with.

God bless!

Esau

To provide one more clarification, Jared made a good point as well in his post saying:

...denying these people Communion also sends a message to those who are not in public life but who hold similar views. When Kerry, Pelosi, et al receive Communion, the unknown abortion-supporting "Katholiks" in the pews are not sufficiently shaken up enough to rethink their murder-support. Alternatively, if Kerry, Pelosi, et al WERE to be denied Communion, some of these people just MIGHT be shocked into examining their pro-slaughter-of-the-innocent position.

However, I don't believe there was any motivation on his or even my part to actually undermine the clergy in their authority for the decision to give or deny the Eucharist to a Catholic that presents him/herself to recieve belongs to the ordained.

caine

I concede that there is no JA cult.

The only sinister conspiritorial organization among neo-con, radtrad, retro-orthodox, intolerant latinist, homophobic, mysoginist Catholics is the one with the elite unit of albino assassins.

I will not speak its name, lest one of them off me with a giant candlestick.

Esau

Indeed, such things are matters for God's ministers (the ordained) to decide for it is they who had been given authority handed down through generations by the imposition of hands, given them by Our Lord.

To whom such verses as those that follow would apply:

Mt 18:18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

but, also, as important:

1 Tm 4:14 Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.

Esau

God bless you, Caine, and Keep Up the Faith! ;^)

caine

Don't forget Ezekiel 33:6

But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the people are not warned, and the sword comes, and takes any one of them; that man is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at the watchman's hand.

Or Matthew 18:6

but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

There's also a snipet from Hermas' The Shepherd

27[104]a:4 Moreover I bid all of you, whoever have received this seal, keep guilelessness, and bear no grudge, and continue not in your wickedness nor in the memory of the offenses of bitterness; but become of one spirit, and heal these evil clefts and take them away from among you, that the owner of the flocks may rejoice concerning them.

27[104a]:5 For he will rejoice, if he find all things whole. But if he find any part of the flock scattered, woe unto the shepherds.

27[104a]:6 For if the shepherds themselves shall have been found scattered, how will they answer for the flocks? Will they say that they were harassed by the flock? No credence will be given them. For it is an incredible thing that a shepherd should be injured by his flock; and he will be punished the more because of his falsehood. And I am the shepherd, and it behoveth me most strongly to render an account for you.


This is why I emphasize the enormous personal responsibility that resides in the person of the bishop and priest and think that - in this matter - its much better to pray for them than "harden their hearts" with harsh criticism.

Esau

This is why I emphasize the enormous personal responsibility that resides in the person of the bishop and priest and think that - in this matter - its much better to pray for them than "harden their hearts" with harsh criticism.

Yes, this would be my point as well, which is why I had chosen the two quotes I had in my post above.

caine

I was seeing your point and raising you 1 excerpt.

Esau

Caine:

I actually enjoyed the fact that you brought Hermas into the fray. I was impressed!

Not that many folks know of what I'd describe an esoteric source since most would typically take quotes off of Scripture alone, although much of what you quoted is clearly present in the Gospels as well as in the Pauline Letters.

Great job, brother!

caine

My wife bought me Jurgens' Faith of the Early Fathers for Christmas last year, and I've been in love ever since.

With patristics, that is. I loved my wife even before she got me those books.

John

Esau said

"Ignore the hateful rants of the man who wrote this quote.

Please continue with the important discussion on Stem Cells. This is truly an significant issue that must be addressed. Don't be distracted into other topics by the boogeymen on the sidelines"

So standing up for not allowing communion to baby killers who are Catholic, as it is the Bishops responsibility to protect the Body of Christ but like JPII , they have sold their souls to the Modern sinful world. Now it is proven that JPII was fully aware of communist clergy in Poland all the while pretending to be a Communist fighter. And we have clergy speaking out against abortion and homosexuality, but actually need to get chastised by a Protestant minister (as in the case of LA) where they have desecrated the 1st century symbol used for Christians to represent homosexuality all with no retribution

Is the church not supposed to safeguard the deposit of faith and morals. Was not communism, a form of godless government condoned by past church teachings? Are the Bishops no better than the Pharisies who handed over our Lord to those who wanted him crucified as they are doing in handing him over Body and Blood to those who deny him and promote death.

So what is so hateful in pointing out any of the above or does the truth hurt?

Brother Cadfael

John,

So what is so hateful in pointing out any of the above or does the truth hurt?

What is so hateful? You have selectively chosen your "facts," ignoring many relevant others, and have "spun" them in the most uncharitable way that you could for the sole purpose of impugning the name of the Holy Father. That is not simply "hateful," it is un-Christlike. Read Matthew 5:22.

Does the truth hurt? Unfortunately, your post doesn't help us answer the question one way or the other.

Esau

Thanks, Brother Cadfael!

As usual, you express your thoughts well.

In this case, you've captured likewise my sentiments as regards John and his comments here.

God bless.

Brother Cadfael

Thanks Esau! I'm going to be offline for a few days, so keep 'em honest!

Esau

I'm going to be offline for a few days...

Your presence will certainly be missed, Brother! ;^)

horatio

It seems some of this is unclear to me. A number of posts refer to the responsibility of the bishop (or priest) to deny communion to those they know are in mortal sin. Other entries suggest that the priest (or bishop) has a choice to make in whether or not they give the Eurcharist to someone they believe or publicly to have represented themselves as in mortal sin.

Do we have any clarification from the Code of Canon Law?

Jamie Beu

253-to-174
They keep getting closer (by bamboozling more people into thinking this is legitimate), but they still don't have the 2/3 needed to override a veto by Pres. Bush.

John

I am deeply disappointed that the hierarchy of the Catholic church does not publicly excommunicate and otherwise repudiate so-called Catholics like Nancy Pelosi and Edward Kennedy. I recognize that they may have incurred an automatic excommunication, but a little publicity would improve the public perception of the church's integrity on this issue.

By failing to excommunicate Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, and others publicly, the church leaves itself open to various charges, for example:

(1) The Archbishop of Boston is too busy reshuffling pedophile priests to pay attention to what Kennedy says (sadly, that appears to be true when Bernard Law was Archbishop);

(2) The Archdiocese of Boston is dependent on contributions from the Kennedy family and does not wish to bite the hand that feeds it.

(3) The church thinks that Pelosi and the others are "good Catholics" despite their public pronouncements.

I am hoping none of those things are true, but I would be more convinced if the church publicly excommunicated them.

Can anyone explain the scandal of the church's silence on this issue?

Esau

253-to-174

They keep getting closer (by bamboozling more people into thinking this is legitimate), but they still don't have the 2/3 needed to override a veto by Pres. Bush.


Unfortunately (in spite of the many perceived errors of Pres. Bush, which some can justifiably assert against him), come 2008 AND THE DEMOCRATS WIN THE PRESIDENCY (as the events of these times may suggest), EXPECT NO SUCH SUPPORT from a Democrat President in terms of motions AGAINST Embryonic Stem Cell Research or other PRO-LIFE issues, for that matter.

Dr. Eric

We will lose this one I'm afraid. Even here in the conservative state of Missouri (or Misery) the referendum passed allowing the harvesting and murder of embryonic babies.

Jared

Dr. Eric: Regarding the MO vote ... I wonder how many people even begin to understand the differences between embrionic stem cells and adult stem cells.

I once got into an argument (on election day '04 on the set of "the West Wing" of all times and places) in which the other person (who, in an interesting but not-really-related sidenote had somehow snuck a fighting knife past the metal-detector and security) called me a liar for claiming that various therapies had come from adult stem cells but that embrionic stem cell research had led to nothing. I didn't have all the facts that day and when faced with a room full of rabidly liberal democrat extras FOAMING (I am not kidding about the foam) and SHOUTING at me, I couldn't bring specifics to mind.

My point is, I'd actually taken the time to read up on it and I couldn't bring out the facts. How much worse off is the vast majority of the voting public, who get all of their "facts" from the TV news--"facts" which never point out that there are even two different types of research at all? They think of "stem cells" as one thing only and moan about how we're opposed to progress.

Esau

How much worse off is the vast majority of the voting public, who get all of their "facts" from the TV news--"facts" which never point out that there are even two different types of research at all? They think of "stem cells" as one thing only and moan about how we're opposed to progress.


Jared:

Good point here!

In fact, the opposition would actually advertise Catholics as being against ALL stem cell research, not knowing (or, if they did know, hiding) the fact that we're actually for certain stem cell research such as those in regards to adult stem cells.

Dr. Eric

We live in a world of sound bite philosophy/theology. Actually reading and studying would take effort. That's why so many Americans don't know what they're talking about and why so many companies are outsourcing.

I'm not castigating Jared for not coming up with any studies off the top of his head, Lord knows that even a geneticist would have been pressed to come up with anything in front of that rabid mob!

Esau

Lord knows that even a geneticist would have been pressed to come up with anything in front of that rabid mob!

...and everybody knows: whoever controls the MOB controls ROME! ;^)

John

Turning to the merits on this question (embryonic stem cell research), and leaving the valid points about excommunication aside, we must consider that these cells are, for the most part, the byproduct of in vitro fertilization.

If a woman cannot conceive in the normal fashion, scientists place her eggs in a petri dish, and fertilize them with her husband's sperm. In this process, a dozen fertilized eggs might be created. Taken together, they are smaller than the period at the end of this sentence, and it is impossible to create just one, using present technology.

Well, the woman does not want a dozen children, she only wants one or two, so they pick out one or two, and implant them into her uterus, and hopefully, she will carry the pregnancy to full term.

The moral question is, what do we do with the "left over" fertilized eggs? There is virtually no chance that they will ever be implanted or carried to term and result in live infants. Given the risks associated with genetic engineering, I am not sure I would want them to be.

The answer to this question, in my view, is that in vitro fertilization is immoral in itself, and we should not be engaged in this activity in the first place.

The liberal Democrats point out (correctly, as a purely factual matter) that these "left over" fertilized eggs are going to be destroyed anyway, so we might as well use them for scientific benefit before they are.

And here is where my analysis has to stop:

Since I think it is wrong to create the fertilized eggs in this manner, I have no idea what to do with them once they are created and not implanted.

Can anyone carry the discussion from here? Thanks.

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31