Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerets
I think I understand the arguments about the storage of fertilized eggs and all the concepts of life beginning at conception. But a chance at a life is still better then no chance at all.
The inconsistency also goes deeper in my eyes in that if one really believes in a life after death. Then would not the life ended by abortion or in vitro be spared the pains of having to endure living in the here and now and go to the after life? I could see their argument more strongly if this was indeed the only life and no other. So me thinks they are not to sure in their faith.
Barney
|
I see where you are coming from but you have ignored the Vatican's position on several topics and replaced them with your own.
Here is a big one. You posit that ending a life by abortion or in vitro would be spared the pains of having to endure living. Such a position ignores another rule -- the rule against abortion. The overriding position of the Vatican is to let nature run its course and to not intervene. Abortion and in vitro selection are impermissible interventions, e.g. man is playing God.
I'm no expert at this stuff. It just seems to me that the paper consistently applies a rule against human intervention between procreation of married spouses.