If I dont go visit my frozen embryo..

[Jamiet99uk]

The ruling does not necessarily reflect the views of all Christians. It's wrong to loop everybody in one large group, that's a failure to appreciate the broadness and diversity in views among the church. Take a look at a video of different denominations and you'll see pretty quickly. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court has no bearing on the Christian faith. Christians can use their faith to best interpret their agreement with said ruling, but just because a Supreme Court in one state made a controversial decision doesn't mean all Christians are bad people. That's quite a jump.

How do you feel about this one?

[Jamiet99uk]

Btw certainly it is true that many Christians in the USA are not extremist racist white nationalist fascists. But Tom Parker is, unfortunately, and he takes a highly unconstitutional approach to the boundaries between church and state.

[DarthPorg36]

The ruling does not necessarily reflect the views of all Christians. It's wrong to loop everybody in one large group, that's a failure to appreciate the broadness and diversity in views among the church. Take a look at a video of different denominations and you'll see pretty quickly. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court has no bearing on the Christian faith. Christians can use their faith to best interpret their agreement with said ruling, but just because a Supreme Court in one state made a controversial decision doesn't mean all Christians are bad people. That's quite a jump.

How do you feel about this one?

Although I think the people making the ruling had good intentions in their minds, I disagree with the decision and the lack of foresight this had. Although protecting lives is an admirable goal, this has effectively made IVF incredibly difficult to access and will do much more harm than good. Also, it further chips away at women's rights, which are already being pushed back in states like Alabama. There is a balance I believe can be found, but this basically just shoved a bunch of people in the state around. Not a great look imo.

[Jamiet99uk]

The ruling does not necessarily reflect the views of all Christians. It's wrong to loop everybody in one large group, that's a failure to appreciate the broadness and diversity in views among the church. Take a look at a video of different denominations and you'll see pretty quickly. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court has no bearing on the Christian faith. Christians can use their faith to best interpret their agreement with said ruling, but just because a Supreme Court in one state made a controversial decision doesn't mean all Christians are bad people. That's quite a jump.

How do you feel about this one?

Although I think the people making the ruling had good intentions in their minds, I disagree with the decision and the lack of foresight this had. Although protecting lives is an admirable goal, this has effectively made IVF incredibly difficult to access and will do much more harm than good. Also, it further chips away at women's rights, which are already being pushed back in states like Alabama. There is a balance I believe can be found, but this basically just shoved a bunch of people in the state around. Not a great look imo.

I think you are too charitable. Alabama's Chief Justice, one of the key people involved in making this decision, is a demonstrably bad person, an openly proud racist neo-confederate. He's a despicable person; whatever we might think about his bible-thumping crankery, it is not even the reason I consider him a fundamentally bad guy.

I think you are correct about the effect of this judgement, though.

[DarthPorg36]

How do you feel about this one?

Although I think the people making the ruling had good intentions in their minds, I disagree with the decision and the lack of foresight this had. Although protecting lives is an admirable goal, this has effectively made IVF incredibly difficult to access and will do much more harm than good. Also, it further chips away at women's rights, which are already being pushed back in states like Alabama. There is a balance I believe can be found, but this basically just shoved a bunch of people in the state around. Not a great look imo.

I think you are too charitable. Alabama's Chief Justice, one of the key people involved in making this decision, is a demonstrably bad person, an openly proud racist neo-confederate. He's a despicable person; whatever we might think about his bible-thumping crankery, it is not even the reason I consider him a fundamentally bad guy.

I think you are correct about the effect of this judgement, though.

Although I try to give people benefit of the doubt, I suppose you are probably right on that point. He's not a great person.

[Krippe]

The ruling does not necessarily reflect the views of all Christians. It's wrong to loop everybody in one large group, that's a failure to appreciate the broadness and diversity in views among the church. Take a look at a video of different denominations and you'll see pretty quickly. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court has no bearing on the Christian faith. Christians can use their faith to best interpret their agreement with said ruling, but just because a Supreme Court in one state made a controversial decision doesn't mean all Christians are bad people. That's quite a jump.

Just as Christians proclaim that they "don't hate the sinner, just the sin", I do not hate the religious, just the religion.

[brainbomb]

I got a call today that my house was too unkempt for my embryo to live in my freezer

[Jamiet99uk]

I got a call today that my house was too unkempt for my embryo to live in my freezer

Do you even live in Alabama?

[BrianBaru]

Every human being starts off as a fertilized egg. Every fertilized egg either dies, or grows into a human being. A fertilized human egg is a tiny human.

If you put a baby in a freezer, it would die.

A fertilized egg is not a baby.

A fertilized egg is not a baby. A newborn is not a toddler. An adolescent is not an adult. All are human lives, just at different stages of development.

[brainbomb]

The purpose of IVF is not to derive personhood from fertilized eggs the purpose is to actually create the conditions for a viable survivable pregnancy. This requires experimentation and a willingness to accept some of these are not going to survive the process.

The purpose of declaring a fertilized egg as a person from a religious perspective is to discourage abortion becoming a normal means of frivilous birth control.

This is taking a far more unhelpful intrustive stance and harming the concept of family, assisted development and allowing parents struggling to have a way to build a family

[brainbomb]

The odds of miscarriage from IVF is actually higher than for a normal means preganancy.

The next step this law will evolve too is prosecuting parents who had IVF that result in miscarriage and jailing them for killing children

[brainbomb]

There will be judicial panels to discuss why the miscarriage happened.
Interrogations about the womans diet and what she did that day.
Lie detector tests to verify if the parents wanted the baby or not.
Capital murder trials for an IVF where the doctor accidentally drops the vial holding the embryo.

They will splay people open in front of a jury to count how many eggs are left.

This is the direction this will go

[CaptainFritz28]

The ruling does not necessarily reflect the views of all Christians. It's wrong to loop everybody in one large group, that's a failure to appreciate the broadness and diversity in views among the church. Take a look at a video of different denominations and you'll see pretty quickly. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court has no bearing on the Christian faith. Christians can use their faith to best interpret their agreement with said ruling, but just because a Supreme Court in one state made a controversial decision doesn't mean all Christians are bad people. That's quite a jump.

Just as Christians proclaim that they "don't hate the sinner, just the sin", I do not hate the religious, just the religion.

So, then, you hate the teachings that all are created equal, that we should love even our enemies, that we should be charitable whenever possible, that we should aid the widowed and poor?

These are the teachings of Christianity, the religion. If you hate the religion, I will presume you mean it in its entirety.

Unless you mean to clarify that you hate the amalgamation of Christianity which people use to justify acts of violence, which are contrary to the religion itself?

[CaptainFritz28]

I'm not familiar with the Alabama ruling, so I won't comment on it before doing some research, but I am curious...

Where do we draw the line of life and non-life, and more importantly, why?

[Jamiet99uk]

Every human being starts off as a fertilized egg. Every fertilized egg either dies, or grows into a human being. A fertilized human egg is a tiny human.

If you put a baby in a freezer, it would die.

A fertilized egg is not a baby.

A fertilized egg is not a baby. A newborn is not a toddler. An adolescent is not an adult. All are human lives, just at different stages of development.

Yes and an even earlier stage of development is the spermatozoa. Should each one of the sperm I produce be given specific legal rights and protections?

[Jamiet99uk]

The odds of miscarriage from IVF is actually higher than for a normal means preganancy.

The next step this law will evolve too is prosecuting parents who had IVF that result in miscarriage and jailing them for killing children

There are already people on the American right wing who thing that mothers who have miscarriages are murdererers.

It's completely fucked up. All they care about is controlling women's bodies.

[Jamiet99uk]

There will be judicial panels to discuss why the miscarriage happened.
Interrogations about the womans diet and what she did that day.
Lie detector tests to verify if the parents wanted the baby or not.
Capital murder trials for an IVF where the doctor accidentally drops the vial holding the embryo.

They will splay people open in front of a jury to count how many eggs are left.

This is the direction this will go

I wish this was satire but it bloody isn't.

The stupidity of these ignorant fucking bastards is mind boggling.

[Jamiet99uk]

I'm not familiar with the Alabama ruling, so I won't comment on it before doing some research, but I am curious...

Where do we draw the line of life and non-life, and more importantly, why?

In the context of a human foetus, I would say the point at which it is likely to be able to survive outside the womb. In UK law this has generally been set at around 24 weeks.

[brainbomb]

If parents leave their frozen embryos in the clinic and they are no longer needed; does the state control them? If the parents divorce does the dad pay child support for the embryos until they turn 18? Or is it until the embryos get utilized is the dad responsible for the child support?

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

The burden of "where does life start and why there" always seems to fall on the pro-choice, which is unfair. The distinctions made by pro life people are equally arbitrary. I'm reminded of the Monty Python moment where a Catholic towns breaks out into song: Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God will be irrate.

I'll be surprised to find out that any of us have a genuinely good reason to draw the line where we do. I'll note that I don't think any of us are women either lol, which might limit our perspective. But we'll basically all be in agreement that a wet dream isn't mass murder, but that killing a one month old would be.

I don't think a fertilized egg has much more moral status than a seperate egg or spermatozoa, and these are squandered all the time by design. I don't think a failure of birth control should imprison a woman to carry the child to term. I think women have an intrinsic right to choose when and with whom to procreate that cannot be superseded by a failure of birth control (let alone a sexual assault). I think a woman's life is more valuable than a fetal life unless she chooses otherwise. Prioritizing the woman's right in this case is also a pragmatic way to support children — a woman who terminates a dangerous pregnancy may live to have more children in the future, the same is true for a woman who aborts in a bad situation (too young, abusive partner, etc.), and in general more children will be born to parents who are ready and willing to raise them if abortion is available.

And yet I find a line intuitively somewhere around the third trimester in a healthy pregnancy, which is hard to distinguish from infanticide. I worry that abortion is occasionally a substitute for social support (e.g., a consequence of poverty), which is abhorrent. I think the best approach for both pro-life and pro-choice folks is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies before they occur, but that requires more and better birth control, which apparently offends the sensibilities of some Alabamans.