You can't even write about the issue without implicitly accepting that the embryos are living human persons. They are alive, then a guy drops them on the ground, then they are not. This manslaughter or murder, nothing else. IVF is immoral and is no different than killing off a child with Downs or even your dumber children.
My problem with IVF is when they delete embrios which basically is human life that die, Trump is like Paul he doesn't like abortion but also don't think is a matter of the federal government
The essence of the problem of course is a failure to define appropriately when “personhood” begins or is bestowed upon a fertilized egg. The problem exists on both ends of the reproductive process. For example, Singer would not even bestow personhood on a newly born infant. It is not simply a “Bible Thumper” problem.
In any event, a blastocyst (small clump of cells) is not a person in any sense that I can understand, and yet I do not consider myself to be pro-abortion. Somewhere in the middle is the meeting (decision) point.
Indeed, the States in general have met “in the middle”. We find most laws restricting abortion have cutoff points typically at 15 weeks. Before yes, after no. I myself, find that too late in the process, but also understand that this is a grand compromise of sorts and can live with it. Alabama perhaps not. On the other hand, that is why we have 50 States and allow such variation of opinion, and law, within.
IVF and abortion as they say is only a “bus ticket away”. Deal with it.
Alabama is a state overloaded with Bible-thumping evangelicals. I don't believe the decision will set a precedent for the country. Maybe fifty years ago, but not now.
I'm not religious, but IVF should be completely banned. All genetic modification of humans needs to be completely banned. Embryos are human beings and alive, and the modification of them for whatever purpose that could be good will ultimately be used in the worst ways ever imaginable. Ted Kaczynski was unimaginably right on this. I do not trust anyone in the world today with such technology. Look at how they've fucked up with mutating pathogens and editing them. They're not even smart enough to place these facilities in super remote regions to prevent release.
They are humans at a different stage of life. As our technology became more advanced we stopped killing and eating infants like Aboriginal Austrailians, to simply leaving them exposed in the wilderness to die. With abortion the the argument stayed the same basically "Oh you're not a human being because you're not an infant!" where as before it was "oh you're not a perfect baby" or "I'm not able to feed you" "You're not a human yet because we haven't give you a name/hasn't been X amount of time since birth."
It's kind of funny how this comment section is full of crazy American conservatives, for whom Emil isn't crazy conservative enough, even though Emil has adopted American conservative positions, like being against Roe vs. Wade, probably just to signal sympathy for American conservatives.
Roe vs Wade did not prohibit the US government or states from regulating reproductive matters, it only prohibited states from banning abortion during the first two trimesters, and states found ways around this by instead banning clinics with regulations. I don't know by what principle anyone thinks that the US shouldn't have a national policy on this, and that abortion should be left to the states alone, except for the principle that American states should have much more power, but almost no one believes that. The religious right certainly doesn't have a principled belief in greater state power, because they want a national abortion ban, and everyone who was in favor of keeping Roe vs. Wade knew that the religious right was going to go for a national ban after Roe was overthrown. Trump obviously couldn't care less about abortion on a personal level, but he is forced to serve the interests of his base, and the religious right is a key part of his base, so he does what they want, given the other constraints.
You can't even write about the issue without implicitly accepting that the embryos are living human persons. They are alive, then a guy drops them on the ground, then they are not. This manslaughter or murder, nothing else. IVF is immoral and is no different than killing off a child with Downs or even your dumber children.
It's clear that the "western world is entering a new world order where the two dimensions of" reverse racism"and "designer babies" intersect.
My problem with IVF is when they delete embrios which basically is human life that die, Trump is like Paul he doesn't like abortion but also don't think is a matter of the federal government
The essence of the problem of course is a failure to define appropriately when “personhood” begins or is bestowed upon a fertilized egg. The problem exists on both ends of the reproductive process. For example, Singer would not even bestow personhood on a newly born infant. It is not simply a “Bible Thumper” problem.
In any event, a blastocyst (small clump of cells) is not a person in any sense that I can understand, and yet I do not consider myself to be pro-abortion. Somewhere in the middle is the meeting (decision) point.
Indeed, the States in general have met “in the middle”. We find most laws restricting abortion have cutoff points typically at 15 weeks. Before yes, after no. I myself, find that too late in the process, but also understand that this is a grand compromise of sorts and can live with it. Alabama perhaps not. On the other hand, that is why we have 50 States and allow such variation of opinion, and law, within.
IVF and abortion as they say is only a “bus ticket away”. Deal with it.
Alabama is a state overloaded with Bible-thumping evangelicals. I don't believe the decision will set a precedent for the country. Maybe fifty years ago, but not now.
Can you do an article comparing embryo selection Vs pre-embryo selection in terms of results?
I'm not religious, but IVF should be completely banned. All genetic modification of humans needs to be completely banned. Embryos are human beings and alive, and the modification of them for whatever purpose that could be good will ultimately be used in the worst ways ever imaginable. Ted Kaczynski was unimaginably right on this. I do not trust anyone in the world today with such technology. Look at how they've fucked up with mutating pathogens and editing them. They're not even smart enough to place these facilities in super remote regions to prevent release.
They are humans at a different stage of life. As our technology became more advanced we stopped killing and eating infants like Aboriginal Austrailians, to simply leaving them exposed in the wilderness to die. With abortion the the argument stayed the same basically "Oh you're not a human being because you're not an infant!" where as before it was "oh you're not a perfect baby" or "I'm not able to feed you" "You're not a human yet because we haven't give you a name/hasn't been X amount of time since birth."
FYI, Alabama just un-banned IVF: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/03/07/alabama-legislature-passes-ivf-fix-on-eve-of-katie-britt-sotu-gop-response/
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
"Theses on Feuerbach" (1845), Thesis 11, Marx Engels Selected Works,(MESW), Volume I, p. 15
It's kind of funny how this comment section is full of crazy American conservatives, for whom Emil isn't crazy conservative enough, even though Emil has adopted American conservative positions, like being against Roe vs. Wade, probably just to signal sympathy for American conservatives.
Roe vs Wade did not prohibit the US government or states from regulating reproductive matters, it only prohibited states from banning abortion during the first two trimesters, and states found ways around this by instead banning clinics with regulations. I don't know by what principle anyone thinks that the US shouldn't have a national policy on this, and that abortion should be left to the states alone, except for the principle that American states should have much more power, but almost no one believes that. The religious right certainly doesn't have a principled belief in greater state power, because they want a national abortion ban, and everyone who was in favor of keeping Roe vs. Wade knew that the religious right was going to go for a national ban after Roe was overthrown. Trump obviously couldn't care less about abortion on a personal level, but he is forced to serve the interests of his base, and the religious right is a key part of his base, so he does what they want, given the other constraints.
Hail Trump.
What do you think of departurism theory?
Which IVF startups are the most promising? Does anyone know? Thank you.