Colorado voters
will get to vote in November on a proposition that defines personhood as beginning at conception. This will have the implication that in vitro fertilization involves murder, as the process standardly involves the disposal of fertilized eggs. As right-to-lifers are also often advocates of IVF, this places them into a bit of a quandary. In my opinion, this should even have the implication that all frozen embryos need to be brought to term--it's surely wrong to freeze people and prevent them from living their lives without their consent.
6 comments:
Hmm, what's the source for the claim that right-to-lifers are also advocates of IVF? In my experience, most right-to-lifers are Catholics, and the Catholic Church forbids IVF...precisely for the reasons you point out.
I see lots of evangelical Protestant right-to-lifers in addition to Catholics. Every recent case of large numbers of multiple births (quadruplets, quintuplets, sextuplets, and now septuplets) I've seen in the media has been an evangelical Protestant or Mormon right-to-lifer using IVF and refusing to engage in "fetal reduction" to ensure the health of the rest.
Adrienne: I guess it is already clear to the groups like Concerned Women for America that IVF is an issue for them, which is why they advocate the adoption of "snowflake babies"--frozen embryos that are the by-products of other couples' IVF.
I think they should have a vote on the speed of light.
Are they going to lower the voting age by one year as well?
Can you get a conception certificate?
If the state decides that the vessel of some "person" is unfit, can it apply to make the "person" a ward of the state? What happens to the vessel then?
Did the Colorado supreme court make a wrong a turn on their way to abu dhabi?
"Did the Colorado supreme court make a wrong a turn on their way to abu dhabi?"
Its a ballot initiative, which means that anybody with only half a brain gets to vote on it.
Post a Comment