• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Hypocrisy, yes or no?

GzuzKryzt

Philosopher
G
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
6,363
The profile:

US-born male citizen, 50, married.
Born, raised and living in Arizona.
Educated middle class, die-hard Christian and Republican.

The issue:

Fertility problem (unknown if male or female) makes them get an IVF.

The question:

Am I correct when I call this a double standard or is IVF in line with bible and party law?



Thank you.
 
William Smith said:
The profile:

US-born male citizen, 50, married.
Born, raised and living in Arizona.
Educated middle class, die-hard Christian and Republican.

The issue:

Fertility problem (unknown if male or female) makes them get an IVF.

The question:

Am I correct when I call this a double standard or is IVF in line with bible and party law?



Thank you.
Click to expand...

Depends on what kind of christian he is. The Catholic church is against it, but American conservatives tend to not take an issue with IVF. There is always the issue of people not adopting enough kids(everyone wants only babies).
 
As others said, it depends on denomination and individual beliefs. I think the official catholic position is against it because it involves the creation of embryos that might not get implanted. As with many issues like this (eg contraception), it seems to be pretty widely ignored - I know quite a few churchgoing catholics who have had IVF.
 
As long as he remembers to refer to any resulting baby as a "miracle" and a "gift from God," he'll be okay. Just don't ever remind god that he didn't really want you to have any babies using his fantastic "gift of sex between man and wife." He doesn't like that.
 
William Smith said:
The profile:

US-born male citizen, 50, married.
Born, raised and living in Arizona.
Educated middle class, die-hard Christian and Republican.

The issue:

Fertility problem (unknown if male or female) makes them get an IVF.

The question:

Am I correct when I call this a double standard or is IVF in line with bible and party law?
Click to expand...

I am unsure. Why precisely do you call it a double standard?


ETA: actually, I kind of want to address the underlying issue. It is possible to be a loyal member of a political party and not agree with every single position on every single issue. I have liberal friends who own guns. I do not call them hypocrites, I admire them for looking at each issue and using their experience, morals, and political philosophy to determine their personal viewpoint. I have conservative friends who do not want to cut social programs.
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
I am unsure. Why precisely do you call it a double standard?
...
Click to expand...

I think you can either have the bible and Republican party line on one hand or IVF, same sex relations, being pro-choice and the like.

I do not think they mix at all - especially not if one is a hardliner. I am pretty much thinking the same as Sun Countess and that is my reason for calling him a hypocrite. I would appreciate more input.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
As others said, it depends on denomination and individual beliefs. I think the official catholic position is against it because it involves the creation of embryos that might not get implanted. As with many issues like this (eg contraception), it seems to be pretty widely ignored - I know quite a few churchgoing catholics who have had IVF.
Click to expand...

And those churchgoing catholics who have had IVF could be called hypocrites, or at least opportunists, right?

My overall point is not to call them names, denounce them as bad citizens and put them on a pillory. We should all dicks our own potatoes.

The point is to show, over time and numerous examples, that these hardline-no-exceptions positions - anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-birth control, etc. - have become untenable in a rational democratic society.

So untenable that even conservative bible thumpers think they should not be followed.
 
William Smith said:
And those churchgoing catholics who have had IVF could be called hypocrites, or at least opportunists, right?
Click to expand...
It probably depends on what the Catholic Church actually says, and what those churchgoing catholics actually do.

Have you considered doing research first, and reaching a conclusion afterwards?

The point is to show, over time and numerous examples, that these hardline-no-exceptions positions - anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-birth control, etc. - have become untenable in a rational democratic society.

So untenable that even conservative bible thumpers think they should not be followed.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that. If hypocrisy is your touchstone, you've just discredited pretty much every position ever held by anyone anywhere. Your favorite political party? Untenable. Because hypocrites.

You want to show that extreme positions aren't mainstream? That'll win you the Nobel Prize in Obviously.

Meanwhile, there's plenty of hypocrisy to be found, even with mainstream positions. Also obviously.

I mean no offense--I just don't see your project going anywhere. Why make a fetish of hypocrisy, anyway?
 
As others have said, the Catholic Church is against it.

As for other denominations- they are either for it or have no position on it. So if he and his wife are Protestants, it probably isn't hypocritical.

It might be hypocritical if the woman were his fiancee or girlfriend.
 
Had an argument about this subfect with a classmate that told the class he was against IVF because God obviously didn't want those people to have kids.
I told him to take off his glasses cos god obviously didnt want him to see clearly or read. Twas marvelous, he pretty much had an epiphany in front of me.
 
An interesting question might be that if procreation were believed to be the purpose of marriage, then is trying IVF mandatory in these cases?
 
Ausmerican said:
Had an argument about this subfect with a classmate that told the class he was against IVF because God obviously didn't want those people to have kids.
I told him to take off his glasses cos god obviously didnt want him to see clearly or read. Twas marvelous, he pretty much had an epiphany in front of me.
Click to expand...

Theprestige, Ausmerican's post pretty much nailed my point.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Not unless you more specifically address the beliefs of the person you referenced in there.
Click to expand...

For the sake of brevity, I went with die-hard Christian and Republican from Arizona. Avoiding to offend anyone's beliefs, I considered this an acceptable ballpark for my inquiry, although I usually try to avoid broad generalisations.

Also inside this park: No same sex relations, no abortions whatsoever, no pre-marital sex, no condoms and no Muslims.
Less taxes, small government, less gun control, unilateral US foreign policy and stricter immigration laws.
 
Kopji said:
An interesting question might be that if procreation were believed to be the purpose of marriage, then is trying IVF mandatory in these cases?
Click to expand...

I think this would depend on the sect as well. Some - like Catholics- claim that the purpose of sex is procreation, and that sex should only occur in a marriage of one man and one woman. Even though Catholics are allowed* to practice "natural planning" methods where they avoid sex during the time around ovulation, god may decide to mess with things and cause a pregnancy anyway (which invariably happens with fertile young couples who use no other birth control).

I can't imagine any religious body having any thoughts on whether IVF should be mandatory for married, infertile couples, because their omniscient bible gods never seem to write things for a future audience. ("One day, verily, after people are able to fly vessels across the distance oceans, babies will be created outside a woman's womb. When this day comes, you must remind your barren women of their duties to carry the children of their rightful owners.")

I' think that for most Christians, IVF falls under the umbrella of "God gave us this gift through doctors and science so we are able to use it."


* It sounds so funny to write that, because married Catholics are adults and shouldn't need permission for anything, and of course, most of them ignore the rules they don't like. It just sucks for those in third world countries who don't have the education or money to do what they want, instead of what some cranky old virgins "allow" them to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom